6 ms·

This feels like it was made to get to the top of somewhere like HN but I'm actually very confused. >I want it to be, but which can also be used to communicate

This feels like it was made to get to the top of somewhere like HN but I'm actually very confused. >I want it to be, but which can also be used to communicate securely with anyone on the planet without being observed by a third party. I don't want to be spied on by Microsoft or Google.I don't want the NSA intercepting my conversations or even their metadata. I don't see what this has to do with the actual computer honestly. You don't want Microsoft to be involved so I'm going to assume you are going to install Linux on whatever you get, awesome, this doesn't stop the NSA or Google from harvesting your data because that doesn't really have anything with the computer. Seems like you want a search engine and ISP that you own as well.

rfrey 6y ago
Alternatively, they want the NSA to obey the law, and for surveillance-for-profit business models to be forbidden.
- guyzero 6y ago
  "surveillance-for-profit business models to be forbidden" Are you going to ban TV networks and credit card companies next? Grocery store loyalty programs? Practically every company these days collects about their users and customers.
  - Ensorceled 6y ago
    Credit companies would do just fine if they couldn't sell your data. Loyalty programs don't need to sell your data, they existed before it was even possible. TV networks ... wait, how is broadcast TV even collecting your data. None of these businesses NEED to collect and sell your behavioural and demographic data to exist. TV and newspapers would probably start doing OK if precision targeted ads were not possible.
    - oaiey 6y ago
      Google how modern TV spies on what you view on your screen (not talking your Netflix App here ;))
      - Ensorceled 6y ago
        Right, I know the bullshit Samsung etc. is up to. How is broadast television doing it?
        guyzero 6y ago
        Not broadcast per se but cable company set top boxes monitor your viewing habits and correlate them with your account which has a bunch of demographic data.
        Ensorceled 6y ago
        Yeah, so not TV Networks (Fox,NBC,ABC,...) but Comcast/AT&T etc.
  - krageon 6y ago
    I don't see why banning those things should be controversial or extreme in any way. Predatory business interests need to die.
  - bmn__ 6y ago
    In a just world — where the basic human right of privacy counts as much as the basic human rights of free speech, free travel, free reproduction, not being tortured or enslaved etc. — they would be forbidden. Let them figure out a way to be profitable without infringing. Unfortunately, the Americans, the Russians and the Chinese are against pervasive privacy and pay only lip service to the UDHR at best.
- exporectomy 6y ago
  And every other country's government to not spy on internet traffic crossing their borders. Good luck communicating with somebody in China. If you use TOR or a VPN or any kind of tunnel over some other service, they'll figure out what you're doing eventually even if they can't read the content.
Black101 6y ago
> You don't want Microsoft to be involved Microsoft works closely with Intel... I wonder if they might have access to the invisible OS running on your PC... (Linux would not disable that)
- mixmastamyk 6y ago
  I've heard it based on Minix, believe it or not.
- oaiey 6y ago
  Why would Microsoft rely on a third party when they have a whole platform above it? And Intel platform is no secret anymore. It is inspected as is Microsoft's behavior.
  - Black101 6y ago
    If you replace Windows with Linux, they need another point of entry.
    - oaiey 6y ago
      Assuming they care about Linux users.
ocdtrekkie 6y ago
Yeah, I think the parent started with some good concepts like "a computer I own" and "not being spied on", but then missed the lack of relation between the two. You can have a computer that does not connect to the Internet, or connects to the Internet very little, or only connects to the Internet through specific communication channels you open in a firewall. That's all very attainable. However, as soon as you communicate with third parties, be it your ISP, a cloud provider, or your end communication partner, you are potentially sharing with more than you intend. It's a "the only way to keep a secret between three people is if two of them are dead" problem. You can't control what other people choose to share.
- JKCalhoun 6y ago
  I'll go further: when have you ever been able to communicate with guaranteed privacy? Telephone? Nope. Ham radio? Nope. Letters sent through the mail? Nope.
  - ROARosen 6y ago
    Letters sent with homing pigeons were mostly private...
    - osobo 6y ago
      Pigeon: ...
    - theshrike79 6y ago
      Trained Peregrine Falcon: Hold my beer.
      - dredmorbius 6y ago
        That'll give you a denial-of-pigeon attack, but does it really risk interception?
      - JasonFruit 6y ago
        Typical: we started with a technical problem, and started bikeshedding it, so now we have drunk falcons.
dr_kiszonka 6y ago
Not sure if this is what the author had in mind, but Chrome OS has over 50% of edu market share. Effectively, a lot of kids in the US are forced to Google's products. (Yes, Chromebooks have many benefits. I know.) https://www.theinformation.com/articles/chromebooks-gain-share-of-education-market-despite-shortages https://www.theinformation.com/articles/chromebooks-gain-sha...
Goz3rr 6y ago
I'm not sure if it's ironic or intentional, but I find it funny that they talk about these points while not having HTTP redirect to HTTPS on their own site, presumably because it's using a self signed certificate.
- oytis 6y ago
  It may have something to do with the fact that in another rant the author complains about how HTTPS makes webmasters dependent on certificate-issuing bodies.
  - DocTomoe 6y ago
    And he is not wrong about that. The HTTPS/SSL infrastructure is byzantine and less concerned with actually encrypting information, but establishing trust that whoever you as the browser are communicating with is in fact the server that you expect them to be. This is not an easy problem to solve... For the longest time, this introduced the ecosystem to professional certification authorities, which are essentially profit-oriented organisations that gauged prices. Let´s Encrypt made some of the situation slightly better, opening up small websites to encryption, but you are still dependent on an external CA and the goodwill of the browser manufacturer to distribute their root certificate with their browsers.
    - oytis 6y ago
      At least in Linux distributions it's up to the distro, not the browser. Not to say you can add your own root certificates you trust if you don't trust your distro. You have to trust someone eventually, that's for sure, nothing can be done here.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

rfrey 6y ago

Alternatively, they want the NSA to obey the law, and for surveillance-for-profit business models to be forbidden.

guyzero 6y ago
"surveillance-for-profit business models to be forbidden" Are you going to ban TV networks and credit card companies next? Grocery store loyalty programs? Practically every company these days collects about their users and customers.
- Ensorceled 6y ago
  Credit companies would do just fine if they couldn't sell your data. Loyalty programs don't need to sell your data, they existed before it was even possible. TV networks ... wait, how is broadcast TV even collecting your data. None of these businesses NEED to collect and sell your behavioural and demographic data to exist. TV and newspapers would probably start doing OK if precision targeted ads were not possible.
  - oaiey 6y ago
    Google how modern TV spies on what you view on your screen (not talking your Netflix App here ;))
    - Ensorceled 6y ago
      Right, I know the bullshit Samsung etc. is up to. How is broadast television doing it?
      - guyzero 6y ago
        Not broadcast per se but cable company set top boxes monitor your viewing habits and correlate them with your account which has a bunch of demographic data.
        Ensorceled 6y ago
        Yeah, so not TV Networks (Fox,NBC,ABC,...) but Comcast/AT&T etc.
- krageon 6y ago
  I don't see why banning those things should be controversial or extreme in any way. Predatory business interests need to die.
- bmn__ 6y ago
  In a just world — where the basic human right of privacy counts as much as the basic human rights of free speech, free travel, free reproduction, not being tortured or enslaved etc. — they would be forbidden. Let them figure out a way to be profitable without infringing. Unfortunately, the Americans, the Russians and the Chinese are against pervasive privacy and pay only lip service to the UDHR at best.
exporectomy 6y ago
And every other country's government to not spy on internet traffic crossing their borders. Good luck communicating with somebody in China. If you use TOR or a VPN or any kind of tunnel over some other service, they'll figure out what you're doing eventually even if they can't read the content.

Black101 6y ago

> You don't want Microsoft to be involved Microsoft works closely with Intel... I wonder if they might have access to the invisible OS running on your PC... (Linux would not disable that)

mixmastamyk 6y ago
I've heard it based on Minix, believe it or not.
oaiey 6y ago
Why would Microsoft rely on a third party when they have a whole platform above it? And Intel platform is no secret anymore. It is inspected as is Microsoft's behavior.
- Black101 6y ago
  If you replace Windows with Linux, they need another point of entry.
  - oaiey 6y ago
    Assuming they care about Linux users.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago

Yeah, I think the parent started with some good concepts like "a computer I own" and "not being spied on", but then missed the lack of relation between the two. You can have a computer that does not connect to the Internet, or connects to the Internet very little, or only connects to the Internet through specific communication channels you open in a firewall. That's all very attainable. However, as soon as you communicate with third parties, be it your ISP, a cloud provider, or your end communication partner, you are potentially sharing with more than you intend. It's a "the only way to keep a secret between three people is if two of them are dead" problem. You can't control what other people choose to share.

JKCalhoun 6y ago
I'll go further: when have you ever been able to communicate with guaranteed privacy? Telephone? Nope. Ham radio? Nope. Letters sent through the mail? Nope.
- ROARosen 6y ago
  Letters sent with homing pigeons were mostly private...
  - osobo 6y ago
    Pigeon: ...
  - theshrike79 6y ago
    Trained Peregrine Falcon: Hold my beer.
    - dredmorbius 6y ago
      That'll give you a denial-of-pigeon attack, but does it really risk interception?
    - JasonFruit 6y ago
      Typical: we started with a technical problem, and started bikeshedding it, so now we have drunk falcons.

dr_kiszonka 6y ago

Not sure if this is what the author had in mind, but Chrome OS has over 50% of edu market share. Effectively, a lot of kids in the US are forced to Google's products. (Yes, Chromebooks have many benefits. I know.) https://www.theinformation.com/articles/chromebooks-gain-share-of-education-market-despite-shortages https://www.theinformation.com/articles/chromebooks-gain-sha...

Goz3rr 6y ago

I'm not sure if it's ironic or intentional, but I find it funny that they talk about these points while not having HTTP redirect to HTTPS on their own site, presumably because it's using a self signed certificate.

oytis 6y ago
It may have something to do with the fact that in another rant the author complains about how HTTPS makes webmasters dependent on certificate-issuing bodies.
- DocTomoe 6y ago
  And he is not wrong about that. The HTTPS/SSL infrastructure is byzantine and less concerned with actually encrypting information, but establishing trust that whoever you as the browser are communicating with is in fact the server that you expect them to be. This is not an easy problem to solve... For the longest time, this introduced the ecosystem to professional certification authorities, which are essentially profit-oriented organisations that gauged prices. Let´s Encrypt made some of the situation slightly better, opening up small websites to encryption, but you are still dependent on an external CA and the goodwill of the browser manufacturer to distribute their root certificate with their browsers.
  - oytis 6y ago
    At least in Linux distributions it's up to the distro, not the browser. Not to say you can add your own root certificates you trust if you don't trust your distro. You have to trust someone eventually, that's for sure, nothing can be done here.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]