3 ms·

I don't think "the masses" were ever interested in general-purpose computing. For them it never started. For people who actually care, I think the concerns are

I don't think "the masses" were ever interested in general-purpose computing. For them it never started. For people who actually care, I think the concerns are overblown and we'll always have access to a machine that can run open software. And yes sure, we might not be able to pay consumer prices for them, but they are not going anywhere. And sure, we might elect a fascist government which will simply ban the technology, or the west will go to war with China making it very difficult to manufacture anything. Unlikely.

antonfire 6y ago
There's a large chunk of enthusiasts between "the masses" and the hard core of people who "actually care" enough (and are rich enough) to go out of their way to have their own machine at home no matter what short of it being illegal.
rbecker 6y ago
No self-respecting author would write "We'll always have access to typewriters without built-in censorship. Sure, we might not be able to pay consumer prices for them, but they are not going anywhere." What makes you so sure the restrictions will stop somewhere you're comfortable with? What happens when unlocked machines are only available to "enterprise" (not unlike a certain Windows version), and you have to agree to audits when buying them? What chance do free operating systems stand, when 99% of users don't even have access to computers that could run them? We need not worry as long as somewhere, in some dark basement, a sysadmin is able to assemble an unlocked personal computer from his company's old hardware?
- jay_kyburz 6y ago
  I guess I'm confident that an open market will always provide for us. I don't know why you think it would not. Right now, today, it has never been easier to just go down to the local mall and buy a general purpose computer, and sure, there are lots of phones, tablets, and consoles on display as well, but there is no less computers as a result.
  - TeMPOraL 6y ago
    > I don't know why you think it would not. I don't know why do you think it would? Both software and hardware-side, there's no end of complaints that power users are being left behind. All the money is in making Fisher-Price software for the masses. Ain't nobody have time to cater for ergonomics or efficiency in computing, it's only a distraction from milking the general population. This, to me, is a clear example of the market underserving a customer segment.
    - Silhouette 6y ago
      Fortunately, businesses still have both plenty of use for general purpose computers and lots of money. PC hardware isn't going away any time soon. The more worrying thing IMHO is that the software to make use of that hardware is becoming increasingly polarised between what's aiming for big businesses and what's aiming for consumer drones. The thing that gives me some hope is that the geeks all those businesses rely on to build the software that makes them billions are almost all in the "lost middle" and, given enough time and inclination, are quite capable of creating open software to destroy those businesses.
    - jokethrowaway 6y ago
      I run a Linux distro on a Macbook Pro and I disagree with you. Sure, I'm as annoyed as you and the author about UEFI, but as long as I can install an OSS bootloader and launch whatever I want, I'm good. It may be a pain, but the tinkering capability is still there. If it wasn't possible to tinker with it, less people would buy that laptop. Having closed hardware is a problem and it definitely doesn't make me feel safe. We may all be full of NSA backdoors, but to be honest I don't care much about it and I assume a large part of the tech knowledgeable feel the same way. I suspect this is why Open Hardware is not more prevalent in the market: not enough interest. I don't care about computer companies making more user friendly devices; we can find a way to hack whatever or just start buying laptop parts from China and make our own laptops. What worries me is if the government will decide to ban cryptography or introduce regulations that force me to change how I tinker with my computer.
    - jay_kyburz 6y ago
- tehjoker 6y ago
  If unrestricted machines are restricted only to people with money, it perpetuates our unjust society that creates a prison-like, behavioral nudge, policed, and restricted experience for the poor and a free democratic state for the rich. This is just another manifestation of the economy producing this result via individual consumer choice that manages to simultaneously enrich everyone at the top. The way to stop this is through legislation and protest, but it's a battle because the state likes locked down computers too.
zhdc1 6y ago
This is a major source of cognitive dissonance. Before social media, the average person had little to no interest in the internet - or PCs in general - aside from email and instant messaging apps. The internet has changed, but it's 99.9% because more people are using it, and their interests and needs are best served by 'it just works'. This change, along with progress in general, has also made life better for technical folks. General purpose computing is dead? Come on. Desktop Linux actually works. Municipal fiber is a thing. Capable enterprise hardware is available online for less than a second hand iPhone, and if you don't have a couple of hundred to spend, a VPS costs less than a hamburger.

antonfire 6y ago

There's a large chunk of enthusiasts between "the masses" and the hard core of people who "actually care" enough (and are rich enough) to go out of their way to have their own machine at home no matter what short of it being illegal.

rbecker 6y ago

No self-respecting author would write "We'll always have access to typewriters without built-in censorship. Sure, we might not be able to pay consumer prices for them, but they are not going anywhere." What makes you so sure the restrictions will stop somewhere you're comfortable with? What happens when unlocked machines are only available to "enterprise" (not unlike a certain Windows version), and you have to agree to audits when buying them? What chance do free operating systems stand, when 99% of users don't even have access to computers that could run them? We need not worry as long as somewhere, in some dark basement, a sysadmin is able to assemble an unlocked personal computer from his company's old hardware?

jay_kyburz 6y ago
I guess I'm confident that an open market will always provide for us. I don't know why you think it would not. Right now, today, it has never been easier to just go down to the local mall and buy a general purpose computer, and sure, there are lots of phones, tablets, and consoles on display as well, but there is no less computers as a result.
- TeMPOraL 6y ago
  > I don't know why you think it would not. I don't know why do you think it would? Both software and hardware-side, there's no end of complaints that power users are being left behind. All the money is in making Fisher-Price software for the masses. Ain't nobody have time to cater for ergonomics or efficiency in computing, it's only a distraction from milking the general population. This, to me, is a clear example of the market underserving a customer segment.
  - Silhouette 6y ago
    Fortunately, businesses still have both plenty of use for general purpose computers and lots of money. PC hardware isn't going away any time soon. The more worrying thing IMHO is that the software to make use of that hardware is becoming increasingly polarised between what's aiming for big businesses and what's aiming for consumer drones. The thing that gives me some hope is that the geeks all those businesses rely on to build the software that makes them billions are almost all in the "lost middle" and, given enough time and inclination, are quite capable of creating open software to destroy those businesses.
  - jokethrowaway 6y ago
    I run a Linux distro on a Macbook Pro and I disagree with you. Sure, I'm as annoyed as you and the author about UEFI, but as long as I can install an OSS bootloader and launch whatever I want, I'm good. It may be a pain, but the tinkering capability is still there. If it wasn't possible to tinker with it, less people would buy that laptop. Having closed hardware is a problem and it definitely doesn't make me feel safe. We may all be full of NSA backdoors, but to be honest I don't care much about it and I assume a large part of the tech knowledgeable feel the same way. I suspect this is why Open Hardware is not more prevalent in the market: not enough interest. I don't care about computer companies making more user friendly devices; we can find a way to hack whatever or just start buying laptop parts from China and make our own laptops. What worries me is if the government will decide to ban cryptography or introduce regulations that force me to change how I tinker with my computer.
  - jay_kyburz 6y ago
tehjoker 6y ago
If unrestricted machines are restricted only to people with money, it perpetuates our unjust society that creates a prison-like, behavioral nudge, policed, and restricted experience for the poor and a free democratic state for the rich. This is just another manifestation of the economy producing this result via individual consumer choice that manages to simultaneously enrich everyone at the top. The way to stop this is through legislation and protest, but it's a battle because the state likes locked down computers too.

zhdc1 6y ago

This is a major source of cognitive dissonance. Before social media, the average person had little to no interest in the internet - or PCs in general - aside from email and instant messaging apps. The internet has changed, but it's 99.9% because more people are using it, and their interests and needs are best served by 'it just works'. This change, along with progress in general, has also made life better for technical folks. General purpose computing is dead? Come on. Desktop Linux actually works. Municipal fiber is a thing. Capable enterprise hardware is available online for less than a second hand iPhone, and if you don't have a couple of hundred to spend, a VPS costs less than a hamburger.