3 ms·

Some of your points are very valid. I do think there is a big difference between Apple and Google. I also think there is a difference between consoles and gen

Some of your points are very valid. I do think there is a big difference between Apple and Google. I also think there is a difference between consoles and general purpose devices that have not being properly explored by anyone and at some point should be identified by the law. That being said, digital rights are a disaster right now, it will take ages before it's fixed. Consoles might need to be fixed too: for some reason, digital items cost the same or more than the physical counterpart, but provide you with less (can't re-sell, can't lend). And this doesn't take into account yet the fact that digital libraries will disappear when people die (can't leave to family your account, in theory). So consoles are not a good example, they are the most abusive ones.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago
> I also think there is a difference between consoles and general purpose devices that have not being properly explored by anyone and at some point should be identified by the law. I disagree and would say that today the difference between these devices is arbitrary. Game console manufacturers don't allow Outlook or Google Docs or whatever on their stores, but there's no reason they couldn't be there. Their absolute control over their platform is no different than Apple's except that Apple is less restrictive. > Consoles might need to be fixed too: for some reason, digital items cost the same or more than the physical counterpart, but provide you with less (can't re-sell, can't lend). And this doesn't take into account yet the fact that digital libraries will disappear when people die (can't leave to family your account, in theory). So consoles are not a good example, they are the most abusive ones. I am by no means defending this practice in consoles. I'm objecting to carving out an exception for them. If you believe that phones should be more open as platforms then you should also believe that the consoles should be too.
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 5y ago
  Good point. Yeah, I'd rather have the same rights digitally everywhere. Makes also things easier. I vote with my wallet and avoid buying consoles (but I can't stop my wife from owning one), but there isn't much more you can do about it, sadly. Politicians tend to be controlled by the money, everyone turns a blind eye to the idea of real digital rights.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 5y ago

> I also think there is a difference between consoles and general purpose devices that have not being properly explored by anyone and at some point should be identified by the law. I disagree and would say that today the difference between these devices is arbitrary. Game console manufacturers don't allow Outlook or Google Docs or whatever on their stores, but there's no reason they couldn't be there. Their absolute control over their platform is no different than Apple's except that Apple is less restrictive. > Consoles might need to be fixed too: for some reason, digital items cost the same or more than the physical counterpart, but provide you with less (can't re-sell, can't lend). And this doesn't take into account yet the fact that digital libraries will disappear when people die (can't leave to family your account, in theory). So consoles are not a good example, they are the most abusive ones. I am by no means defending this practice in consoles. I'm objecting to carving out an exception for them. If you believe that phones should be more open as platforms then you should also believe that the consoles should be too.

Fire-Dragon-DoL 5y ago
Good point. Yeah, I'd rather have the same rights digitally everywhere. Makes also things easier. I vote with my wallet and avoid buying consoles (but I can't stop my wife from owning one), but there isn't much more you can do about it, sadly. Politicians tend to be controlled by the money, everyone turns a blind eye to the idea of real digital rights.