11 ms·

Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment, in which we learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices, learning how they work to the bits, plus som

Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment, in which we learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices, learning how they work to the bits, plus some random Linux thrown in. This comment is ignoring that a device that does all that without you having to worry about how it works is a tool way more powerful than one in which you need to at least know how to build everything from scratch with an enormous learning curve. Curiosity can be about design, the arts, literature, drawing, composing music, making and editing videos. All of which you can do so much better and so much more democratically on these “opinionated” devices. So please, enough with this narrative, it’s really outdated and based on such a limited world view.

otabdeveloper4 5y ago
You missed his point. BigTech is trying to make open computer hardware and software illegal, because "security". That is a loss for everyone, even if tinkering with computers is not your hobby.
- tommit 5y ago
  I mean, that point was in there, sure. But I get the comment you replied to regarding how the OP comment reads.
- vladvasiliu 5y ago
  > BigTech is trying to make open computer hardware and software illegal, because "security". I wonder what they stand to gain from this, since they wouldn't bother if there wasn't a benefit. Android I can possibly understand, what with Google being an ad-company and expecting to track users. But Apple doesn't seem to be doing that all that much anymore. For the tractor situation, John Deere & friends expect to capture the business of independent repair shops, so there's a gain in their locking down the devices. If I buy an iPhone to run myOS on it, how's this a loss to Apple? Especially since they don't charge for IOS updates, and they also support their phones for a long time, so if I don't buy a new iPhone every year it's not because I'm running some custom OS. My iPhone 7 still has all the latest updates and I haven't paid Apple one cent ever since I bought it used more than four years ago.
  - otabdeveloper4 5y ago
    Simple - close the door to any possible competition or disruption in the future. A future with only one or two computing monopolies is a desired end state for history to BigTech.
  - blackoil 5y ago
    Apple is not in biz of selling phone or laptop. They sell complete ecosystem. If you own an iPhone, airpod are magical, AirTag/iCloud makes sense. Why not also buy Macbook to tinker with own apps and an iPad when you need pencil/touch. And not just current, you also capture all future innovation, so you can charge for digital downloads. You can make new rules to charge for all digital transactions across all apps. What you are suggesting is to allow 3rd party to join in the ecosystem. If IBM had been smarter and launched PC as a closed platform it would have been a 10/100 trillion dollar enterprise.
    - vladvasiliu 5y ago
      > What you are suggesting is to allow 3rd party to join in the ecosystem. Not necessarily. They could still continue to charge for every download, just as I can, and already do, listen to music on my iPhone without an Apple Music subscription and without purchasing from the iTunes store. If I want the whole Apple experience, I will continue using macOS / IOS. Hell, that's the reason why I started buying MacBooks when I could afford them: the "apple experience". But I also run Linux on my work PC, because for that I don't care about the Apple experience. But I hate my HP laptop, for comfort reasons. If I could buy a MacBook and have Linux run on it as well as it does on the hp, I would (because I love the hardware) and that would be a net gain for Apple, wouldn't it? I get the whole point of the "experience" and "ecosystem", etc. Up until a few years ago I absolutely loved it. Still love my iphone and wouldn't switch to android. But now I can't stand macOS anymore for my work needs. I'm looking to buy a new laptop to use Linux on it. The offers from Lenovo / HP / Dell don't look all that great to me. I would absolutely buy an MBP if I knew Linux worked perfectly on it, but I know it doesn't, so Apple doesn't get to make a sale. The point is: If I want to tinker with an iPhone and would not buy one if I couldn't, why is it a loss for Apple to sell an extra phone, even if the buyer won't consume their other digital products? The seller wouldn't have consumed them anyway, especially without buying the iPhone. Yes, there's the support side of things, but again, they could have some sort of warranty voiding system in place.
icelancer 5y ago
There is no reason the machine can't do everything you said and everything the parent said.
- BluSyn 5y ago
  There are fundamental engineering trade-offs here. The amount of effort required to secure a device AND make it accessible to "tinkerers" would be an effort worthy of an MIT research lab. It's not trivial, and a huge security risk to satisfy 0.01% of the user base. Especially when such users will likely just buy an open source device anyways. Seems like a huge waste of effort to me.
  - fartcannon 5y ago
    Do you think Apple engineers don't have access under the hood? Simply provide that access to those who request it, everyone else can keep it locked. Problem solved.
    - camillomiller 5y ago
      In which reality where Facebook doesn't exist do you write from? :D
    - om2 5y ago
      This program exists to get that level of access: https://developer.apple.com/programs/security-research-device/ https://developer.apple.com/programs/security-research-devic...
      - fartcannon 5y ago
        "The initial application period ended August 24. Applicants will receive an update this fall." This is not at all what we are looking for.
  - vladvasiliu 5y ago
    I'm not overly familiar with the low-level details of iPhones and Android phones, but it's not clear to me why it would be such a big effort to allow one to install whatever OS they like on an iPhone. Maybe display a big, scary "unofficial OS, you're on your own, don't bother us if your iPhone becomes unusable". Maybe have one jump through some hoops, like getting an "approval" code by signing some mile-long EULA on the iCloud account stating you forego any software-related warranty / support. This should be enough to deter "regular users" from messing with their phones, and Apple wouldn't have to go to any length to guarantee that a "restored" device isn't compromised. Kind of like the KNOX thing on Samsung phones used to work. And this actually seems to be possible, since people are having success with running Linux, a non-apple sanctioned OS, on the M1 Macs, which have the secure enclave, etc. My understanding is that whatever issues they are experiencing are related to hardware support.
CraigJPerry 5y ago
I don’t know. Why can’t we have both? Why can’t we have devices that permit “mucking about” but also when configured appropriately allow us to ignore the low level details and muck about with higher level stuff? They don’t have to be mutually exclusive despite “bt whole home wifi app has detected this is a jailbroken device and for your safety will not run”. It’s my wifi, it’s my phone!
- khazhoux 5y ago
  You literally have both, and more. Right now, I have a nearly uncrackable walled-garden iphone on my desk. And a mac laptop running XCode (learning about Metal programming), and at the same time running an Amiga emulator (tinkering with 68k assembly), and a windows gaming laptop next to it, and a breadboard on the floor with a pile of resistors and capacitors and transistors. So what's the problem again?
  - tpm 5y ago
    The problem is the kid will be given the iPhone and not the breadboard.
    - simonh 5y ago
      For a communications device they will take into school, that they rely on for school work, communicating with parents and teachers, and with each other on social media and contains a lot of private information, that is probably the right choice. An open system with zero security and no guard rails is simply not appropriate for that use.
      - fartcannon 5y ago
        How about an open system WITH security and guard rails that can be enabled/disabled by, I dunno, the user who paid for it? It's not either/or. Parents can be the guardians of their children's phone, enabling all the security Apple pretends to enable with a password. The power of Apples marketing is astonishing.
creata 5y ago
This has to be the least charitable reading of Crazyontap's comment. Couldn't you have just inserted the implied: > I was just talking to a friend the other day on how badly Apple and Google are trying their best to kill curiosity and creativity [with regard to the computer they're using]. Also: > So please, enough with this narrative, it’s really outdated and based on such a limited world view. You'll have to explain how it's a "limited world view" to suggest that we can have our cake and eat it too: that we can have open, hackable platforms that are also popular and easy to use.
- fartcannon 5y ago
  From the tone, I believe they are intentionally trolling for reactions. It is probably best not to feed them.
  - camillomiller 5y ago
    It's called democratic discussion, but sure, go ahead, call me a troll. If that's your only argument, I think you've effectively helped in explaining what a limited world view is with a very practical example.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- camillomiller 5y ago
  Creative professionals gained immensely through Apple's approach. If I'm a music producer, a film maker, a writer, a graphic designer, and so on, I gain immensely from a computer that just works 99% of the time. I don't need or want to spend time on thinking what's the best set of drivers I should install, or worrying about all the dependencies of this new open source program with no hint of UX-design I've just installed. And yet, anything that isn't exactly that is often dismissed as lower class by people who have learned that over years and years, and don't seem to understand that there's an entire world of good people who just want to apply their curiosity at a different level. That is, in my opinion, a limited world view. In my experience, it also does not happen both ways. People that can't do that (but maybe can master film coloring post-processing -- I invite you to give a stab at that, if you dare) have enormous respect of the low level tinkerers. The opposite is very often not through.
boudin 5y ago
Why do you make the assumption that a device with freedom would be a device to worry about? This is exactlty what the op is saying. The Apple narrative of "we have full control over your device and your software for your own good" is horrible and worrying. I'm not gonna make a parallel about Apple source of inspiration but it doesn't scream creativity, freedom and certainly not democracy.
- p49k 5y ago
  Apple’s approach is pragmatic. If they offered anyone the ability to jailbreak, you would see major app makers manipulating naive users into jailbreaking in order to bypass security, payment restrictions or similar. Even the limited options Apple provides are already abused, such as Facebook convincing users to install VPN profiles with their Ovano product and abusing it to spy on users. Having the option defeats the fundamental advantages their approach offers. There are a lot of problems with Apple’s approach from an antitrust perspective and fair competition should be regulated through legislation, but there are good reasons for closed ecosystems to exist and plenty of great alternatives for people who want something more open.
  - collectiveness 5y ago
    At what point do we need to start worrying about Apple holding too much power over their closed ecosystem and can potentially abuse it?
    - camillomiller 5y ago
      Until we leave in a capitalistic system? Apple should be scrutinized, but I prefer a world in which a company with strong values polices the ethical limits of technology, to one where companies like Facebook (and Google, to a lesser extent) hypocritically push an open agenda just to exploit such technologies to milk our data.
  - fsflover 5y ago
    > If they offered anyone the ability to jailbreak, you would see major app makers manipulating naive users into jailbreaking in order to bypass security This is FUD. Linux works flawlessly despite giving all the freedoms. Typical users don't install anything outside the repositories. Apple has countless problems with security and privacy in their App Store.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
amelius 5y ago
No. It's not just that individuals can't tinker with hardware. It's also startups having this problem. Apple is integrating the entire supply chain. What we need is better "modularization" of the market where everybody has access to important components. > Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment, in which we learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices, learning how they work to the bits, plus some random Linux thrown in. Totally unnecessary generalization.
collectiveness 5y ago
I think you are mixing up "not having to worry about how it works" with "having the freedom to tinker". We should demand both. One reason is for our curiosity. The other is to have checks and balances on the big companies.
- camillomiller 5y ago
  We should. What I'm saying is that we still have that, and more. The suggestion is mostly the opposite, from comments like yours. That we should have less things like the Apple ecosystem, which has been fundamental in creating an entire generation of creative tinkerers, exactly because of its opinionated and broadly simplified nature.
  - int_19h 5y ago
    We have an either-or choice, and there's no reason for it to be like that.
- Applejinx 5y ago
  The big companies have all the technical resources, and profoundly strong motivation, to apply their own malware and harm the user. You do NOT check and/or balance big companies by allowing them the freedom to tinker alongside the little guy. They will wrest the machines to their purposes every time, and they are Not Happy about obstacles in their path. Having checks and balances on big companies is a very good argument but it points the opposite direction from how you're seeing it…
_Understated_ 5y ago
It's about having choice: Microsoft used to be quite good at making stuff usable but the underlying geekery was still there and could allow control to the max if you wanted it. It worked for mom & pops and techs alike but corporations new attitude of "We'll decide what's best and remove other options" is a bloody pain in the arse now. A particularly bad one is this insistence on not allowing me to permanently say "no" to something. It's always "maybe later" or "remind me in 24 hrs" or similar... even Firefox does it now when you set it up - I think it was to do with sending FF to my mobile or something - but the message was "do it now" or "do it later"... I don't want it EVER! So, no! I don't want anyone else's opinion for stuff like this - let me decide what's best for me and allow me to tinker if I want!
- cromulent 5y ago
  If anyone knows where the "I'm happy to control things myself" setting is in Teams, please share. I'm really tired of it deciding when I should be on mute, or when it should warn me that I am muted. Just let me do it.
  - squiggleblaz 5y ago
    > If anyone knows where the "I'm happy to control things myself" setting is in Teams, please share. It's the X button in the top right corner. In the olden days we had individual developers who would work out the internal API these applications used to work. I wonder if that's still theoretically possible. Surely it must be? Even if the client app needs a signed certificate, since it runs in an unsigned environment (i.e. Linux) it should be possible to grab the certificate and present that when you need it.
- vosper 5y ago
  > Microsoft used to be quite good at making stuff usable but the underlying geekery was still there and could allow control to the max if you wanted it. Windows 10 is the best Windows ever for the vast majority of people who use Windows. Same with Office. But you can still install whatever software you want on your Windows machine. Explain to me again how this is worse than what we used to have; where Microsoft have gone wrong in how they build software? Is it perfect? Of course not - no-one could even agree on what that means. But let’s be realistic about how much progress has actually happened: it’s a lot.
eptcyka 5y ago
You can learn about design, arts, literature, drawing et al without having to sacrifice the freedom to own your device. Apple devices deliver great UX despite their walled garden. They can have their ecosystem without locking people out of running their own software or making it difficult to repair it. Don't create a false dichotomy.
shaan7 5y ago
Ah well, you are basically replying to a limited world view by another limited one. Notice how you say "Curiosity *can be* about design, ..." but then the tone of your comment reads like you mean "Curiosity *should only be* about design, ...". Please don't do that. Curiosity can be about anything, lets just leave it at that.
fimbulvetr 5y ago
These are sad times when someone who wants to "hack" and learn and disassemble and reassemble and just "understand" gets shit on "hacker news". "Limited world view"? Really? They are the one with the "Limited world view"?
- handrous 5y ago
  The notion that computing devices that aren't wide-open are "kill[ing] curiosity and creativity" in anything other than a very restricted sense is a limited world view, yes. That such devices being available as an option at all rankles people so and drives them to insult anyone who likes them as mindless consumers (very common in discussions like this, on this site) is downright parochial.
fouric 5y ago
I count five logical fallacies here: > Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment Unnecessarily inflamatory - perhaps an ad-hominem attack, or appeal to emotion. > in which we learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices Strawman argument - this is a blatant misrepresentation of GP's point. > This comment is ignoring that a device that does all that without you having to worry about how it works is a tool way more powerful than one in which you need to at least know how to build everything from scratch with an enormous learning curve False dichotomy (there's no reason you can't have an opinionated device that works flawlessly OOTB while also being extremely hackable) and another strawman (OP never advocated for you having to do everything yourself, only have the ability to tinker). > So please, enough with this narrative, it’s really outdated and based on such a limited world view. Another appeal to emotion. I encourage you to take a class on logical argument, because this ain't it.
- witherk 5y ago
  Someone got a lot out of their high school debate club

otabdeveloper4 5y ago

You missed his point. BigTech is trying to make open computer hardware and software illegal, because "security". That is a loss for everyone, even if tinkering with computers is not your hobby.

tommit 5y ago
I mean, that point was in there, sure. But I get the comment you replied to regarding how the OP comment reads.
vladvasiliu 5y ago
> BigTech is trying to make open computer hardware and software illegal, because "security". I wonder what they stand to gain from this, since they wouldn't bother if there wasn't a benefit. Android I can possibly understand, what with Google being an ad-company and expecting to track users. But Apple doesn't seem to be doing that all that much anymore. For the tractor situation, John Deere & friends expect to capture the business of independent repair shops, so there's a gain in their locking down the devices. If I buy an iPhone to run myOS on it, how's this a loss to Apple? Especially since they don't charge for IOS updates, and they also support their phones for a long time, so if I don't buy a new iPhone every year it's not because I'm running some custom OS. My iPhone 7 still has all the latest updates and I haven't paid Apple one cent ever since I bought it used more than four years ago.
- otabdeveloper4 5y ago
  Simple - close the door to any possible competition or disruption in the future. A future with only one or two computing monopolies is a desired end state for history to BigTech.
- blackoil 5y ago
  Apple is not in biz of selling phone or laptop. They sell complete ecosystem. If you own an iPhone, airpod are magical, AirTag/iCloud makes sense. Why not also buy Macbook to tinker with own apps and an iPad when you need pencil/touch. And not just current, you also capture all future innovation, so you can charge for digital downloads. You can make new rules to charge for all digital transactions across all apps. What you are suggesting is to allow 3rd party to join in the ecosystem. If IBM had been smarter and launched PC as a closed platform it would have been a 10/100 trillion dollar enterprise.
  - vladvasiliu 5y ago
    > What you are suggesting is to allow 3rd party to join in the ecosystem. Not necessarily. They could still continue to charge for every download, just as I can, and already do, listen to music on my iPhone without an Apple Music subscription and without purchasing from the iTunes store. If I want the whole Apple experience, I will continue using macOS / IOS. Hell, that's the reason why I started buying MacBooks when I could afford them: the "apple experience". But I also run Linux on my work PC, because for that I don't care about the Apple experience. But I hate my HP laptop, for comfort reasons. If I could buy a MacBook and have Linux run on it as well as it does on the hp, I would (because I love the hardware) and that would be a net gain for Apple, wouldn't it? I get the whole point of the "experience" and "ecosystem", etc. Up until a few years ago I absolutely loved it. Still love my iphone and wouldn't switch to android. But now I can't stand macOS anymore for my work needs. I'm looking to buy a new laptop to use Linux on it. The offers from Lenovo / HP / Dell don't look all that great to me. I would absolutely buy an MBP if I knew Linux worked perfectly on it, but I know it doesn't, so Apple doesn't get to make a sale. The point is: If I want to tinker with an iPhone and would not buy one if I couldn't, why is it a loss for Apple to sell an extra phone, even if the buyer won't consume their other digital products? The seller wouldn't have consumed them anyway, especially without buying the iPhone. Yes, there's the support side of things, but again, they could have some sort of warranty voiding system in place.

icelancer 5y ago

There is no reason the machine can't do everything you said and everything the parent said.

BluSyn 5y ago
There are fundamental engineering trade-offs here. The amount of effort required to secure a device AND make it accessible to "tinkerers" would be an effort worthy of an MIT research lab. It's not trivial, and a huge security risk to satisfy 0.01% of the user base. Especially when such users will likely just buy an open source device anyways. Seems like a huge waste of effort to me.
- fartcannon 5y ago
  Do you think Apple engineers don't have access under the hood? Simply provide that access to those who request it, everyone else can keep it locked. Problem solved.
  - camillomiller 5y ago
    In which reality where Facebook doesn't exist do you write from? :D
  - om2 5y ago
    This program exists to get that level of access: https://developer.apple.com/programs/security-research-device/ https://developer.apple.com/programs/security-research-devic...
    - fartcannon 5y ago
      "The initial application period ended August 24. Applicants will receive an update this fall." This is not at all what we are looking for.
- vladvasiliu 5y ago
  I'm not overly familiar with the low-level details of iPhones and Android phones, but it's not clear to me why it would be such a big effort to allow one to install whatever OS they like on an iPhone. Maybe display a big, scary "unofficial OS, you're on your own, don't bother us if your iPhone becomes unusable". Maybe have one jump through some hoops, like getting an "approval" code by signing some mile-long EULA on the iCloud account stating you forego any software-related warranty / support. This should be enough to deter "regular users" from messing with their phones, and Apple wouldn't have to go to any length to guarantee that a "restored" device isn't compromised. Kind of like the KNOX thing on Samsung phones used to work. And this actually seems to be possible, since people are having success with running Linux, a non-apple sanctioned OS, on the M1 Macs, which have the secure enclave, etc. My understanding is that whatever issues they are experiencing are related to hardware support.

CraigJPerry 5y ago

I don’t know. Why can’t we have both? Why can’t we have devices that permit “mucking about” but also when configured appropriately allow us to ignore the low level details and muck about with higher level stuff? They don’t have to be mutually exclusive despite “bt whole home wifi app has detected this is a jailbroken device and for your safety will not run”. It’s my wifi, it’s my phone!

khazhoux 5y ago
You literally have both, and more. Right now, I have a nearly uncrackable walled-garden iphone on my desk. And a mac laptop running XCode (learning about Metal programming), and at the same time running an Amiga emulator (tinkering with 68k assembly), and a windows gaming laptop next to it, and a breadboard on the floor with a pile of resistors and capacitors and transistors. So what's the problem again?
- tpm 5y ago
  The problem is the kid will be given the iPhone and not the breadboard.
  - simonh 5y ago
    For a communications device they will take into school, that they rely on for school work, communicating with parents and teachers, and with each other on social media and contains a lot of private information, that is probably the right choice. An open system with zero security and no guard rails is simply not appropriate for that use.
    - fartcannon 5y ago
      How about an open system WITH security and guard rails that can be enabled/disabled by, I dunno, the user who paid for it? It's not either/or. Parents can be the guardians of their children's phone, enabling all the security Apple pretends to enable with a password. The power of Apples marketing is astonishing.

creata 5y ago

This has to be the least charitable reading of Crazyontap's comment. Couldn't you have just inserted the implied: > I was just talking to a friend the other day on how badly Apple and Google are trying their best to kill curiosity and creativity [with regard to the computer they're using]. Also: > So please, enough with this narrative, it’s really outdated and based on such a limited world view. You'll have to explain how it's a "limited world view" to suggest that we can have our cake and eat it too: that we can have open, hackable platforms that are also popular and easy to use.

fartcannon 5y ago
From the tone, I believe they are intentionally trolling for reactions. It is probably best not to feed them.
- camillomiller 5y ago
  It's called democratic discussion, but sure, go ahead, call me a troll. If that's your only argument, I think you've effectively helped in explaining what a limited world view is with a very practical example.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
camillomiller 5y ago
Creative professionals gained immensely through Apple's approach. If I'm a music producer, a film maker, a writer, a graphic designer, and so on, I gain immensely from a computer that just works 99% of the time. I don't need or want to spend time on thinking what's the best set of drivers I should install, or worrying about all the dependencies of this new open source program with no hint of UX-design I've just installed. And yet, anything that isn't exactly that is often dismissed as lower class by people who have learned that over years and years, and don't seem to understand that there's an entire world of good people who just want to apply their curiosity at a different level. That is, in my opinion, a limited world view. In my experience, it also does not happen both ways. People that can't do that (but maybe can master film coloring post-processing -- I invite you to give a stab at that, if you dare) have enormous respect of the low level tinkerers. The opposite is very often not through.

boudin 5y ago

Why do you make the assumption that a device with freedom would be a device to worry about? This is exactlty what the op is saying. The Apple narrative of "we have full control over your device and your software for your own good" is horrible and worrying. I'm not gonna make a parallel about Apple source of inspiration but it doesn't scream creativity, freedom and certainly not democracy.

p49k 5y ago
Apple’s approach is pragmatic. If they offered anyone the ability to jailbreak, you would see major app makers manipulating naive users into jailbreaking in order to bypass security, payment restrictions or similar. Even the limited options Apple provides are already abused, such as Facebook convincing users to install VPN profiles with their Ovano product and abusing it to spy on users. Having the option defeats the fundamental advantages their approach offers. There are a lot of problems with Apple’s approach from an antitrust perspective and fair competition should be regulated through legislation, but there are good reasons for closed ecosystems to exist and plenty of great alternatives for people who want something more open.
- collectiveness 5y ago
  At what point do we need to start worrying about Apple holding too much power over their closed ecosystem and can potentially abuse it?
  - camillomiller 5y ago
    Until we leave in a capitalistic system? Apple should be scrutinized, but I prefer a world in which a company with strong values polices the ethical limits of technology, to one where companies like Facebook (and Google, to a lesser extent) hypocritically push an open agenda just to exploit such technologies to milk our data.
- fsflover 5y ago
  > If they offered anyone the ability to jailbreak, you would see major app makers manipulating naive users into jailbreaking in order to bypass security This is FUD. Linux works flawlessly despite giving all the freedoms. Typical users don't install anything outside the repositories. Apple has countless problems with security and privacy in their App Store.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

amelius 5y ago

No. It's not just that individuals can't tinker with hardware. It's also startups having this problem. Apple is integrating the entire supply chain. What we need is better "modularization" of the market where everybody has access to important components. > Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment, in which we learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices, learning how they work to the bits, plus some random Linux thrown in. Totally unnecessary generalization.

collectiveness 5y ago

I think you are mixing up "not having to worry about how it works" with "having the freedom to tinker". We should demand both. One reason is for our curiosity. The other is to have checks and balances on the big companies.

camillomiller 5y ago
We should. What I'm saying is that we still have that, and more. The suggestion is mostly the opposite, from comments like yours. That we should have less things like the Apple ecosystem, which has been fundamental in creating an entire generation of creative tinkerers, exactly because of its opinionated and broadly simplified nature.
- int_19h 5y ago
  We have an either-or choice, and there's no reason for it to be like that.
Applejinx 5y ago
The big companies have all the technical resources, and profoundly strong motivation, to apply their own malware and harm the user. You do NOT check and/or balance big companies by allowing them the freedom to tinker alongside the little guy. They will wrest the machines to their purposes every time, and they are Not Happy about obstacles in their path. Having checks and balances on big companies is a very good argument but it points the opposite direction from how you're seeing it…

_Understated_ 5y ago

It's about having choice: Microsoft used to be quite good at making stuff usable but the underlying geekery was still there and could allow control to the max if you wanted it. It worked for mom & pops and techs alike but corporations new attitude of "We'll decide what's best and remove other options" is a bloody pain in the arse now. A particularly bad one is this insistence on not allowing me to permanently say "no" to something. It's always "maybe later" or "remind me in 24 hrs" or similar... even Firefox does it now when you set it up - I think it was to do with sending FF to my mobile or something - but the message was "do it now" or "do it later"... I don't want it EVER! So, no! I don't want anyone else's opinion for stuff like this - let me decide what's best for me and allow me to tinker if I want!

cromulent 5y ago
If anyone knows where the "I'm happy to control things myself" setting is in Teams, please share. I'm really tired of it deciding when I should be on mute, or when it should warn me that I am muted. Just let me do it.
- squiggleblaz 5y ago
  > If anyone knows where the "I'm happy to control things myself" setting is in Teams, please share. It's the X button in the top right corner. In the olden days we had individual developers who would work out the internal API these applications used to work. I wonder if that's still theoretically possible. Surely it must be? Even if the client app needs a signed certificate, since it runs in an unsigned environment (i.e. Linux) it should be possible to grab the certificate and present that when you need it.
vosper 5y ago
> Microsoft used to be quite good at making stuff usable but the underlying geekery was still there and could allow control to the max if you wanted it. Windows 10 is the best Windows ever for the vast majority of people who use Windows. Same with Office. But you can still install whatever software you want on your Windows machine. Explain to me again how this is worse than what we used to have; where Microsoft have gone wrong in how they build software? Is it perfect? Of course not - no-one could even agree on what that means. But let’s be realistic about how much progress has actually happened: it’s a lot.

eptcyka 5y ago

You can learn about design, arts, literature, drawing et al without having to sacrifice the freedom to own your device. Apple devices deliver great UX despite their walled garden. They can have their ecosystem without locking people out of running their own software or making it difficult to repair it. Don't create a false dichotomy.

shaan7 5y ago

Ah well, you are basically replying to a limited world view by another limited one. Notice how you say "Curiosity *can be* about design, ..." but then the tone of your comment reads like you mean "Curiosity *should only be* about design, ...". Please don't do that. Curiosity can be about anything, lets just leave it at that.

fimbulvetr 5y ago

These are sad times when someone who wants to "hack" and learn and disassemble and reassemble and just "understand" gets shit on "hacker news". "Limited world view"? Really? They are the one with the "Limited world view"?

handrous 5y ago
The notion that computing devices that aren't wide-open are "kill[ing] curiosity and creativity" in anything other than a very restricted sense is a limited world view, yes. That such devices being available as an option at all rankles people so and drives them to insult anyone who likes them as mindless consumers (very common in discussions like this, on this site) is downright parochial.

fouric 5y ago

I count five logical fallacies here: > Another peak self-absorbed Hacker News comment Unnecessarily inflamatory - perhaps an ad-hominem attack, or appeal to emotion. > in which we learn that curiosity only means tinkering with devices Strawman argument - this is a blatant misrepresentation of GP's point. > This comment is ignoring that a device that does all that without you having to worry about how it works is a tool way more powerful than one in which you need to at least know how to build everything from scratch with an enormous learning curve False dichotomy (there's no reason you can't have an opinionated device that works flawlessly OOTB while also being extremely hackable) and another strawman (OP never advocated for you having to do everything yourself, only have the ability to tinker). > So please, enough with this narrative, it’s really outdated and based on such a limited world view. Another appeal to emotion. I encourage you to take a class on logical argument, because this ain't it.

witherk 5y ago
Someone got a lot out of their high school debate club