4 ms·

All computers use transistors. Should we expose them to the user? Should we expose to the user the system libraries used by the OS? Should we expose the sourc

All computers use transistors. Should we expose them to the user? Should we expose to the user the system libraries used by the OS? Should we expose the source code of the OS? Because the OS is also made from a bunch of files.

ghoward 5y ago
Did the user create the OS, libraries, or the transistors? By the user's actions, their files were created. They own that data. We should expose it to them. The other things, they probably did not create. We don't need to expose that. Nice whataboutism, but there is a difference. Edit: Also, yes, we should give the user access to the OS and system libraries. They own the computer, and we should allow them to do with it what they wish.
rektide 5y ago
Yes on all accounts. For users that want such. QEMU exposes the transistors. There are even better OpenFPGA grade simulation tools that we are making to even more detailedly model the transistors. Many chips have very extensive debug interfaces we can use to expose the inner workings of systems. Users should have access. We should absolutely expose the system libraries. On Android this has been an essential tool for many users to improve their daily existence. It's a huge point of controversy that Google has hired the Magisk developer who did just that, and that now the library is giving up some of it's former skills to help users manipulate system libraries. https://9to5google.com/2021/08/29/magisk-android-changes-google/ https://9to5google.com/2021/08/29/magisk-android-changes-goo... Yes, we should definitely expose the source code. I'd love it if more programs were actively debuggable. Debian for example makes it fairly easy to download debug packages, with all the debugging symbols. The kernel should be accessible. Treating users like end users is not cool & keeps humanity from getting good, from learning & understanding the world. Even if few do take up the option, the option to explore the world about us is something computing ought value.

ghoward 5y ago

Did the user create the OS, libraries, or the transistors? By the user's actions, their files were created. They own that data. We should expose it to them. The other things, they probably did not create. We don't need to expose that. Nice whataboutism, but there is a difference. Edit: Also, yes, we should give the user access to the OS and system libraries. They own the computer, and we should allow them to do with it what they wish.

rektide 5y ago

Yes on all accounts. For users that want such. QEMU exposes the transistors. There are even better OpenFPGA grade simulation tools that we are making to even more detailedly model the transistors. Many chips have very extensive debug interfaces we can use to expose the inner workings of systems. Users should have access. We should absolutely expose the system libraries. On Android this has been an essential tool for many users to improve their daily existence. It's a huge point of controversy that Google has hired the Magisk developer who did just that, and that now the library is giving up some of it's former skills to help users manipulate system libraries. https://9to5google.com/2021/08/29/magisk-android-changes-google/ https://9to5google.com/2021/08/29/magisk-android-changes-goo... Yes, we should definitely expose the source code. I'd love it if more programs were actively debuggable. Debian for example makes it fairly easy to download debug packages, with all the debugging symbols. The kernel should be accessible. Treating users like end users is not cool & keeps humanity from getting good, from learning & understanding the world. Even if few do take up the option, the option to explore the world about us is something computing ought value.