3 ms·

It's kind of amazing that computing in general, and the internet in particular, is as open and free as it is (contrast with the closed end-to-end "appliance" mo

It's kind of amazing that computing in general, and the internet in particular, is as open and free as it is (contrast with the closed end-to-end "appliance" model of gaming consoles, or to some extent iOS). Cory Doctorow has been ringing alarm bells for over a decade about both technical and legal efforts to end general purpose computation itself, or at least to make it more the exception than the norm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEvRyemKSg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEvRyemKSg https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Coming_War_on_General_Computation https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Coming_War_on_General_Com...

dmos62 6y ago
> end general purpose computation itself, or at least to make it more the exception than the norm I'd argue, cautiously, that general computation is already an exception. That's why I prefer Linux to Windows. On Linux I can issue a command from a general command interface (the CLI) to just play a video. If I only want audio, it's an option away. I can script things together. Most of my tools are interoperable. That's because I use FOSS, free protocols, free formats, free tech in general. Everything works together and everything augments each other. Windows, the popular workstation, is no that. It's a system of systems, where everything is a monolithic closed box that you can't get inside. It's inside your computer, you use it, but it's not yours. It's on loan from someone else. Interoperability is virtually non-existent, and there isn't such a thing as a usable CLI (an environment that would connect everything together). That's not general computing, I argue. General computing involves ther power to generalize, use the computing technology in arbitrary ways. Closed software, customer lock-in and all that other corporate bs is the anti-thesis of that. Longer rant than expected. I find it a frustrating issue. Mostly because I intimately feel like we're paying a very high price for the greed of the few.
- Scene_Cast2 6y ago
  One thing that might be coming up is CPUs reducing the user capability to fully control the system (regardless of whether you run Linux or Windows). One such example is Intel ME. In the future, if the compute paradigm shifts towards something cloud-like, we might all be "stuck" inside an isolated Intel SGX container (or vice versa).
  - ddingus 6y ago
    Licenses required for homebrew/legacy general purpose computers to join the network.
  - rmrfstar 6y ago
    Anyone who doesn't know much about ME should read [1]. [1] https://itsfoss.com/fact-intel-minix-case/ https://itsfoss.com/fact-intel-minix-case/
- jrockway 6y ago
  > On Linux I can issue a command from a general command interface (the CLI) to just play a video. If I only want audio, it's an option away. I can script things together...Windows, the popular workstation, is not that. I use the same video player on Windows that you use on Linux, mpv. And I have a ton of scripts I use to navigate my video library. Windows doesn't put any burden on apps to not be interoperable. Plenty of apps interoperate just fine.
  - dmos62 6y ago
    That's great, I wasn't aware that mpv was portable to Windows. Writting the above I vaguely realised that the video player example didn't have many legs to stand on. I used it because, for me, the interoperability of mpv and ytdl is a poster child for taking content that's on a closed platform (Youtube) and lifting it out for high interoperability with the rest of the system. It's a fair point that Windows doesn't put burden on applications to be less interoperable, but it doesn't facilitate it either. The UNIX philosophy has completely bypassed Windows. You can do things on its command-line, especially if you augment it in various ways, but do you ever feel like it's a first-class citizen on Windows, or its ecosystem? I'd argue there's reasons for why, as a rule of thumb, only the biggest FOSS projects are compatible with Windows.
- RhodoYolo 6y ago
  Why are you trying to scare all of us?

dmos62 6y ago

> end general purpose computation itself, or at least to make it more the exception than the norm I'd argue, cautiously, that general computation is already an exception. That's why I prefer Linux to Windows. On Linux I can issue a command from a general command interface (the CLI) to just play a video. If I only want audio, it's an option away. I can script things together. Most of my tools are interoperable. That's because I use FOSS, free protocols, free formats, free tech in general. Everything works together and everything augments each other. Windows, the popular workstation, is no that. It's a system of systems, where everything is a monolithic closed box that you can't get inside. It's inside your computer, you use it, but it's not yours. It's on loan from someone else. Interoperability is virtually non-existent, and there isn't such a thing as a usable CLI (an environment that would connect everything together). That's not general computing, I argue. General computing involves ther power to generalize, use the computing technology in arbitrary ways. Closed software, customer lock-in and all that other corporate bs is the anti-thesis of that. Longer rant than expected. I find it a frustrating issue. Mostly because I intimately feel like we're paying a very high price for the greed of the few.

Scene_Cast2 6y ago
One thing that might be coming up is CPUs reducing the user capability to fully control the system (regardless of whether you run Linux or Windows). One such example is Intel ME. In the future, if the compute paradigm shifts towards something cloud-like, we might all be "stuck" inside an isolated Intel SGX container (or vice versa).
- ddingus 6y ago
  Licenses required for homebrew/legacy general purpose computers to join the network.
- rmrfstar 6y ago
  Anyone who doesn't know much about ME should read [1]. [1] https://itsfoss.com/fact-intel-minix-case/ https://itsfoss.com/fact-intel-minix-case/
jrockway 6y ago
> On Linux I can issue a command from a general command interface (the CLI) to just play a video. If I only want audio, it's an option away. I can script things together...Windows, the popular workstation, is not that. I use the same video player on Windows that you use on Linux, mpv. And I have a ton of scripts I use to navigate my video library. Windows doesn't put any burden on apps to not be interoperable. Plenty of apps interoperate just fine.
- dmos62 6y ago
  That's great, I wasn't aware that mpv was portable to Windows. Writting the above I vaguely realised that the video player example didn't have many legs to stand on. I used it because, for me, the interoperability of mpv and ytdl is a poster child for taking content that's on a closed platform (Youtube) and lifting it out for high interoperability with the rest of the system. It's a fair point that Windows doesn't put burden on applications to be less interoperable, but it doesn't facilitate it either. The UNIX philosophy has completely bypassed Windows. You can do things on its command-line, especially if you augment it in various ways, but do you ever feel like it's a first-class citizen on Windows, or its ecosystem? I'd argue there's reasons for why, as a rule of thumb, only the biggest FOSS projects are compatible with Windows.
RhodoYolo 6y ago
Why are you trying to scare all of us?