3 ms·

90% of the people I know are not what most hackers would qualify as makers. Think of like teachers, who use it at home after work to make something cute for the

90% of the people I know are not what most hackers would qualify as makers. Think of like teachers, who use it at home after work to make something cute for their classroom or a friend. By going this route, they almost certainly make more money. Hacker news users are not normal users.

ddingus 6y ago
Truth. And we are the firewall too. Those ordinary people, who may not realize it even, depend on us to push back hard. Nobody else will. Few are qualified even. It is strange to be living in a time where law, government is so damn unaware and apparently, uncaring about these things.
- tomxor 6y ago
  Yes, it's like an informal representative democracy. Those who specialize in something should consider they are part of the minority capable of representing the interests of those who do not specialize in it - tech or otherwise. The nice thing about tech is that it's possible for us to push back by hacking on stuff and opening it up rather than resorting to legislative tools, and this can have the same effect of forcing those manufacturers hand but without the artificiality of law.
  - ddingus 6y ago
    Sadly, legislation will need to be a part of the whole effort. Tons of us won't like it. And when we don't, we can also point to why we just can't have nice things.
- brianwawok 6y ago
  The downside is, we aren't even united. Many of us really smart geeks thinks Stallman is the way. If we can't see the source code of every single thing we have, we don't have it. Free or die! Many others of us think that it's more important privacy is respected. Smooth user experiences are more important than perfect freedom of code. So Apple is the way. You may not know the code on your device, but at least it isn't being sold to the world. And still others think the Google/Facebook way is right. They provide great services to users! Yes they make money selling private data, but their free tools are invaluable to our life. With such a divided view among the "tech elite", how could we really stop anything? Agree that federal law is really the only hope for this kind of stuff, but that is rather hard to do for many reasons.
  - ddingus 6y ago
    The path to solidarity is when we realize all of those ways have a time, place, manner where they are right, or good, or can be tolerated. This is not about "the one, right way" at all. It is all about what makes good sense for humans and that it continues over a longer period of time. And many of these things are not exclusive. Smooth does not have to mean closed. Free with ADS does not have to also mean no privacy. Etc... Open, in the Stallman sense, is not always important. Open data vs open code, and machines, who owns, what is actually a rental, etc... can be resolved to something more livable without being draconian, or useless.

ddingus 6y ago

Truth. And we are the firewall too. Those ordinary people, who may not realize it even, depend on us to push back hard. Nobody else will. Few are qualified even. It is strange to be living in a time where law, government is so damn unaware and apparently, uncaring about these things.

tomxor 6y ago
Yes, it's like an informal representative democracy. Those who specialize in something should consider they are part of the minority capable of representing the interests of those who do not specialize in it - tech or otherwise. The nice thing about tech is that it's possible for us to push back by hacking on stuff and opening it up rather than resorting to legislative tools, and this can have the same effect of forcing those manufacturers hand but without the artificiality of law.
- ddingus 6y ago
  Sadly, legislation will need to be a part of the whole effort. Tons of us won't like it. And when we don't, we can also point to why we just can't have nice things.
brianwawok 6y ago
The downside is, we aren't even united. Many of us really smart geeks thinks Stallman is the way. If we can't see the source code of every single thing we have, we don't have it. Free or die! Many others of us think that it's more important privacy is respected. Smooth user experiences are more important than perfect freedom of code. So Apple is the way. You may not know the code on your device, but at least it isn't being sold to the world. And still others think the Google/Facebook way is right. They provide great services to users! Yes they make money selling private data, but their free tools are invaluable to our life. With such a divided view among the "tech elite", how could we really stop anything? Agree that federal law is really the only hope for this kind of stuff, but that is rather hard to do for many reasons.
- ddingus 6y ago
  The path to solidarity is when we realize all of those ways have a time, place, manner where they are right, or good, or can be tolerated. This is not about "the one, right way" at all. It is all about what makes good sense for humans and that it continues over a longer period of time. And many of these things are not exclusive. Smooth does not have to mean closed. Free with ADS does not have to also mean no privacy. Etc... Open, in the Stallman sense, is not always important. Open data vs open code, and machines, who owns, what is actually a rental, etc... can be resolved to something more livable without being draconian, or useless.