3 ms·

I've given up hoping that we can ever get to this stage or even reverse the situation to what it was ca 2000. It seems to me we've lost it for good - for the fo

I've given up hoping that we can ever get to this stage or even reverse the situation to what it was ca 2000. It seems to me we've lost it for good - for the foreseeable future anyway. My personal action has been to withdraw from most of the net, no Google accounts, no social media accounts, no online shopping etc. Essentially, I've reverted to almost pre net days. I've even reduced email to a trickle, I've killed off subs from list servers etc. My diversity of activity is only a tiny fraction of what it was a decade ago. This is the price I'm prepared to pay but I know I'm one of very few (and that's the key problem - too few people are complaining). I reckon it's lost because even highly intelligent friends of mine some of who have been in security and surveillance work and who know the issues very well and hate the present situation simply find it too exhausting to continue fighting. As they say and as I know, it's an ongoing struggle. Every day, it's a new issue and another battle. For example, I use Linux on PCs where ever possible and my Windows is still Win 7 with automatic updates turned off (because that's as far as I'm prepared to trust Windows), but my caved-in security/surveillance buddies use Win 10 and don't bother to root their Android phones and use Gmail and even Zoom because they complain that they can't fight or are not prepared to fight their families, kids etc. all of whom use social media, Gmail and Win 10 etc., etc. Even I who am more stubborn than most gets criticized by family members who, whilst they have some understanding of the problem, aren't prepared to give up or go cold turkey on these highly addictive products. As I said in other posts about COVID-19, I can't understand why people can't enjoy the isolation like I do (I've so much to occupy me I can't get bored). This is the problem, whilst I'm prepared to give up the net's goodies, Big Tech's adductive products, my family and so many others are just not prepared to do so. This was the true genius of those in Big Tech - I detest them with a passion for ruining the net, but I give them 11/10 for brilliance - for developing schemes that make them billions of which ordinary punters, once trapped, have no means of escape from. Essentially, most people on the planet are so in love with their 'free' Big Tech toys that they not prepared to give them up. As such, there's no pressure on governments to do anything about the situation. We're in the same position with copywrite and patent laws - people aren't marching in the streets, throwing stones through the RIAA's or writer's guild windows, so nothing ever happens. The other problem is that calls like this, whilst very common, aren't consolidated into a worldwide movement, and in my opinion, that's the real crux of our problem. Until there's common unity nothing will happen. Unity and consolidation is everything. All disparate groups need to be brought together. For example, the right to repair groups have similar aims - they too must be included. As I've said, I don't see this happening anytime soon - as too many of those I've mentioned are also addicted to Big Tech's electronic heroin, so it remains a lost cause. I just wish it weren't so.

L_Rahman 6y ago
This a peak comment of a particular style of hacker news commentator - the I will die on a hill for one very specific thing and I don't understand why other people cannot see it my way. Question to OP: do you see a distinction between addictive scroll and like based social media versus Windows/Gmail/Zoom or are they all Big Tech heroin to you?
- hilbert42 6y ago
  Yes. Every service or utility is different, and every one of the various sub-functions of each has a different level of interaction with and or effect on human minds. If measured on a black-to-white scale, each and every service/utility as well as their various sub-functions would have intervals whose beginning and end points would be different shades of gray, so too would the lengths of their intervals. This is further complicated by the fact that these ranges would be different for every person on the planet. Whist the collective range of interactions and effects isn't infinite, it is for all practical purposes. What I am referring to is the net worldwide effect(s). If you like, consider them integrands or areas under curves. Again, this is made more complex by the fact that each service or utility has changed (and is still changing) over time. Let me give you a simplistic but important example: operating systems. The third operating system I had anything to do with was CP/M. It came self-contained and complete on one floppy. There was no registration necessary and it didn't dial home to Digital Research even with a completely unrestricted internet connection between the computer and D.R. CP/M's primary purpose was to act as an 'intermediate utility' to make it easier for users to load and run programs. It did precious little else. Now move to the other extreme. Windows 10 purports still to be an operating system and the fact that it loads and runs some programs puts it into the category of operating systems. I say some programs because Microsoft is now censoring what programs can be run, and from recent announcements this will become more restricted over time. The next point is that Windows 10 secretly talks home on multiple fronts and these are all unknown to the user, in doing so it steals users' data and, to date, there's no legislative process in any country that can stop Microsoft from collecting that information—information that can only be decoded by Microsoft. The third point is that Windows uses/allows advertising—even if you pay outright for Windows 10. Fourth point is that with every new version of Windows, Microsoft deliberately obsoletes older technology so that it can increase profits by forcing users to upgrade hardware. MS's primary planned obsolescence mechanism is refusing to develop software drivers for old hardware for new versions of Windows as well as keeping essential internal system calls/software interfaces/HAL code etc. proprietary and secret (so third parties cannot them). Microsoft, thus, is one of the biggest producers of e-waste in the world. Again, there are no legislative mechanisms anywhere to stop Microsoft doing this. Essentially, Microsoft is too big for politicians anywhere in the world to take it on, as the risks to their political careers are too great. Ipso facto, effectively Microsoft is tampering with democracy, as politicians are too scared to act in the best interests of the citizenry. My last point is that Microsoft takes it upon itself to experiment in social engineering, which it has done with almost every new version of Windows (the last six being the most influential). That is, features and interfaces are changed at whim and these cause considerable disruption to users—not to mention that most are useless or are of little value—and if you consider the cost of retraining, maintenance, etc. worldwide then it accounts for millions and millions of wasted dollars, not to mention the enormous loss of human time and effort. With Windows 10, the matter is made worse by the fact that users cannot turn off automatic upgrades, which means that new features and interfaces can be added or changed at will—often against users' wishes. Moreover, this is not the end of it, Microsoft has conned AMD, Intel and Qualcomm to adopt its new Pluton security for Windows. As with most security systems introduced by large manufactures in recent times, their introduction has more to do with ousting completion than it does with security, (this has been obvious to even to Blind Freddy for many years but again politicians aren't game to touch it for reasons given above): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFY0a_VOGbE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFY0a_VOGbE https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Coming_War_on_General_Computation https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Coming_War_on_General_Com... …And that's just the beginning, almost any half-witted observer could write books on the subject it's so vast. The facts are that these changes and many others introduced by Big Tech have principally been driven by profit and with little or no oversight or for consideration of the effects on human users. In effect, users are guinea pigs who haven't given their permission. This has to stop and only legislation can change things effectively. Google/Microsoft officials 'if you do this or that then we'll lock you up' would work absolute wonders. REMEMBER: What I've said about the progression from DR's CP/M to Microsoft's Windows 10 all happened without users' permission! Moreover, because these huge companies have intimidated legislators to such a degree that even existing anti-monopoly laws haven't been called into play, thus their products have had no effective competition. In effect, Windows is a de facto utility, and at law should be treated as such—effectively we should 'nationalize' it by regulating it to the hilt. Clearly that won't begin with the US but perhaps some country brave enough or prepared to take on or ignore the WTO may eventually lead the way.

L_Rahman 6y ago

This a peak comment of a particular style of hacker news commentator - the I will die on a hill for one very specific thing and I don't understand why other people cannot see it my way. Question to OP: do you see a distinction between addictive scroll and like based social media versus Windows/Gmail/Zoom or are they all Big Tech heroin to you?

hilbert42 6y ago
Yes. Every service or utility is different, and every one of the various sub-functions of each has a different level of interaction with and or effect on human minds. If measured on a black-to-white scale, each and every service/utility as well as their various sub-functions would have intervals whose beginning and end points would be different shades of gray, so too would the lengths of their intervals. This is further complicated by the fact that these ranges would be different for every person on the planet. Whist the collective range of interactions and effects isn't infinite, it is for all practical purposes. What I am referring to is the net worldwide effect(s). If you like, consider them integrands or areas under curves. Again, this is made more complex by the fact that each service or utility has changed (and is still changing) over time. Let me give you a simplistic but important example: operating systems. The third operating system I had anything to do with was CP/M. It came self-contained and complete on one floppy. There was no registration necessary and it didn't dial home to Digital Research even with a completely unrestricted internet connection between the computer and D.R. CP/M's primary purpose was to act as an 'intermediate utility' to make it easier for users to load and run programs. It did precious little else. Now move to the other extreme. Windows 10 purports still to be an operating system and the fact that it loads and runs some programs puts it into the category of operating systems. I say some programs because Microsoft is now censoring what programs can be run, and from recent announcements this will become more restricted over time. The next point is that Windows 10 secretly talks home on multiple fronts and these are all unknown to the user, in doing so it steals users' data and, to date, there's no legislative process in any country that can stop Microsoft from collecting that information—information that can only be decoded by Microsoft. The third point is that Windows uses/allows advertising—even if you pay outright for Windows 10. Fourth point is that with every new version of Windows, Microsoft deliberately obsoletes older technology so that it can increase profits by forcing users to upgrade hardware. MS's primary planned obsolescence mechanism is refusing to develop software drivers for old hardware for new versions of Windows as well as keeping essential internal system calls/software interfaces/HAL code etc. proprietary and secret (so third parties cannot them). Microsoft, thus, is one of the biggest producers of e-waste in the world. Again, there are no legislative mechanisms anywhere to stop Microsoft doing this. Essentially, Microsoft is too big for politicians anywhere in the world to take it on, as the risks to their political careers are too great. Ipso facto, effectively Microsoft is tampering with democracy, as politicians are too scared to act in the best interests of the citizenry. My last point is that Microsoft takes it upon itself to experiment in social engineering, which it has done with almost every new version of Windows (the last six being the most influential). That is, features and interfaces are changed at whim and these cause considerable disruption to users—not to mention that most are useless or are of little value—and if you consider the cost of retraining, maintenance, etc. worldwide then it accounts for millions and millions of wasted dollars, not to mention the enormous loss of human time and effort. With Windows 10, the matter is made worse by the fact that users cannot turn off automatic upgrades, which means that new features and interfaces can be added or changed at will—often against users' wishes. Moreover, this is not the end of it, Microsoft has conned AMD, Intel and Qualcomm to adopt its new Pluton security for Windows. As with most security systems introduced by large manufactures in recent times, their introduction has more to do with ousting completion than it does with security, (this has been obvious to even to Blind Freddy for many years but again politicians aren't game to touch it for reasons given above): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFY0a_VOGbE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFY0a_VOGbE https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Coming_War_on_General_Computation https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Coming_War_on_General_Com... …And that's just the beginning, almost any half-witted observer could write books on the subject it's so vast. The facts are that these changes and many others introduced by Big Tech have principally been driven by profit and with little or no oversight or for consideration of the effects on human users. In effect, users are guinea pigs who haven't given their permission. This has to stop and only legislation can change things effectively. Google/Microsoft officials 'if you do this or that then we'll lock you up' would work absolute wonders. REMEMBER: What I've said about the progression from DR's CP/M to Microsoft's Windows 10 all happened without users' permission! Moreover, because these huge companies have intimidated legislators to such a degree that even existing anti-monopoly laws haven't been called into play, thus their products have had no effective competition. In effect, Windows is a de facto utility, and at law should be treated as such—effectively we should 'nationalize' it by regulating it to the hilt. Clearly that won't begin with the US but perhaps some country brave enough or prepared to take on or ignore the WTO may eventually lead the way.