3 ms·

A user has to go out of their way to flash an OS too, I'm not sure I buy the argument that open architecture is going to surprise people who also know how to fl

by toolz 5y ago

A user has to go out of their way to flash an OS too, I'm not sure I buy the argument that open architecture is going to surprise people who also know how to flash an OS to a very new and unsupported device. No one is trivially flashing different OSes to pinephone and thus they'd need a good deal of domain knowledge to even achieve this goal. Effectively that means no one is flashing an OS to the pinephone, getting it to work but somehow is ignorant to the fact that pinephone has a battery and that battery could present danger if handled improperly. It seems like a safety measure that increases complexity which could potentially decrease safety just as likely as it is to increase safety.

DarylZero 5y ago
Someone could accidentally flash an invalid image to a phone. Happens all the time. Or maybe they flash the latest Linux kernel dev branch and it crashes. That shouldn't disable battery safety.
- toolz 5y ago
  okay so if faulty flashing is the problem, how does flashing two parts of the device make flashing better?
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    They're independent of each other, so flashing the OS can never damage the other chip. Isn't it obvious?
yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
We are literally having this conversation on an article about a case where it would be useful; if battery control was on a separate controller that was flashed separately, then you could install OpenBSD and not worry about starting a fire.
- toolz 5y ago
  What do you mean? Developing a chip with contained firmware isn't free or equivalent to software definitions, if that feature was necessary you may not even yet be in a position where you have a pinephone the even flash a new OS onto. Further the article has domain knowledge and knew about this issue. Making my point about the type of person capable of flashing another OS as being someone capable of understanding the risks.
  - DarylZero 5y ago
    Understanding the risks is what makes a person want a design that eliminates them!
    - toolz 5y ago
      As stated before, moving the risk somewhere else does not eliminate it.
      - DarylZero 5y ago
        You can and should eliminate this particular risk when flashing the OS.
  - yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
    I'm not suggesting that it's not FOSS firmware, just that it runs on its own controller and is flashed independently of the main system. Kind of like how the Pinephone modem runs its own Linux, but without the blobs that that uses (modems are more proprietary than power controllers need to be)

by toolz 5y ago

DarylZero 5y ago

Someone could accidentally flash an invalid image to a phone. Happens all the time. Or maybe they flash the latest Linux kernel dev branch and it crashes. That shouldn't disable battery safety.

toolz 5y ago
okay so if faulty flashing is the problem, how does flashing two parts of the device make flashing better?
- DarylZero 5y ago
  They're independent of each other, so flashing the OS can never damage the other chip. Isn't it obvious?

yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago

We are literally having this conversation on an article about a case where it would be useful; if battery control was on a separate controller that was flashed separately, then you could install OpenBSD and not worry about starting a fire.

toolz 5y ago
What do you mean? Developing a chip with contained firmware isn't free or equivalent to software definitions, if that feature was necessary you may not even yet be in a position where you have a pinephone the even flash a new OS onto. Further the article has domain knowledge and knew about this issue. Making my point about the type of person capable of flashing another OS as being someone capable of understanding the risks.
- DarylZero 5y ago
  Understanding the risks is what makes a person want a design that eliminates them!
  - toolz 5y ago
    As stated before, moving the risk somewhere else does not eliminate it.
    - DarylZero 5y ago
      You can and should eliminate this particular risk when flashing the OS.
- yjftsjthsd-h 5y ago
  I'm not suggesting that it's not FOSS firmware, just that it runs on its own controller and is flashed independently of the main system. Kind of like how the Pinephone modem runs its own Linux, but without the blobs that that uses (modems are more proprietary than power controllers need to be)