3 ms·
I don't see this as a "features" problem. I think the correct way to approach this is in terms of "control". By designing their devices that way (non-unlockable
by EMIRELADERO 5y ago
I don't see this as a "features" problem. I think the correct way to approach this is in terms of "control". By designing their devices that way (non-unlockable bootloaders, signature verification on every app or executable with hardcoded public keys etc) companies have essentially introduced a new paradigm in which the legal owner of the device has less control over it than its manufacturer. That is the issue here.
- jrockway 5y agoYeah. What people are complaining about is cryptography to prevent them from using their thing as they wish. Nobody is demanding API documentation from Sony, people are happy to reverse engineer that. But it doesn't matter because you can't give the machine valid code and have it execute, for no good reason other than that you don't know a magic number. The problem is that building platforms is expensive and if people can use your thing for whatever they want, that thing that they want is often not giving you money. My conclusion is that there shouldn't even be game consoles. They're just a tax on everyone that wants to play games.