3 ms·

Do you ever own anything highly technical? My phone requires regular updates to keep it secure; as does my computer, my TV, etc. If I get my home heating repair

Do you ever own anything highly technical? My phone requires regular updates to keep it secure; as does my computer, my TV, etc. If I get my home heating repaired then it has to be with someone registered or my home insurance is void. My first 2 cars, I could work on. They were old, easy to fix and didn't require special tools. My 2006 Yaris has a pressurized diesel system I can't mess with. So that needs specialist knowledge.

selfhoster11 5y ago
I definitely own my Linux desktop. I still have to accept auto-updates to stay secure, but I trust these random software authors not to screw me over infinitely more than I'd trust Microsoft or Google.
- brainwipe 5y ago
  I understand the issue of trust. I think my point still stands. You don't really own it unless you're doing the kernel fixes yourself.
mullen 5y ago
My phone and TV continue to work doing their primary job if I don't have them attached to the Internet. My Google Pixel 5 Pro will continue to operate as a phone only if it is removed from Internet and unable to install updates or check into the Google Mothership. Same with my Sony TV. Yes, they lose some functionality because they are not on the Internet but I would expect that because those functionalities require the Internet. However, my car should always work as a car, even without Internet access or ever checking with the Car Manufacturer Mothership. Yes, I can expect mapping feature to not work, but when I start my car, it should always start.
- brainwipe 5y ago
  But if the phone network decides to change how connections are made you decide not to update your phone, it won't work. 1G is deprecated. 2G has 11 years left in it in the UK. If you don't get your car serviced; it will cease to work and servicing will require updates. In most modern cars you are beholden to specialist knowledge to do that. I agree with your trust issue but I think we already trust technology companies for many parts of our lives.
nix0n 5y ago
"Feature phones" exist, Linux PCs exist, non-smart TVs exist (all of these come with tradeoffs). The difference is, in some places, it is not possible to own a new car. One of those places is the USA, where you miss out on a lot if you don't have access to a car.
- brainwipe 5y ago
  Linux is still updated by someone that isn't you. Even "old" cars require specialist knowledge. You're still beholden to someone else. The difference is now you're being asked to trust someone new.
kkfx 5y ago
My phone so far can't kill me, at least it's extremely unlikely, "my" car if does not obey a command might kill me or kill someone else leaving me as responsible for that. That's an important difference. Also my phone need a certain level of complexity "my" car have NO REASON to from my own personal perspective: I do not need a connected car. I do not need a car where the OEM have the control and I have not. Such choice for cars are made for the sake of OEM, of surveillance capitalism, not for end users. Also I do my best NOT using "my phone" exactly because of the crappy crap it is, I'll do my best to be desktop-bound, FLOSS desktop, I can't do much for UEFI and other fw crap, but at least they are less invasive and untrustable that Android/iOS. For me, for cars and social evolution in general there is only one option: a big push from the people that mandate open hardware and free software making surveillance so heavily punished that no one have interest to steer in that direction.
- brainwipe 5y ago
  It's true that a car can kill and that is an important difference but I don't think that is what's new here. What appears to be new is you're being asked to trust something new. My heating system can kill me and my family. I trust the engineer to do a good job. That's no different to my car. My 2006 Yaris has a computer that could cause the engine to explode. The engineers where my car is serviced have must trust. But truly, in either of those cases my ownership is beholden to others. I don't truly own it without support from others. Your FLOSS desktop will receive updates from people you don't know. So the difference here is trust. I completely agree with the social evolution statement; that is inevitable.

selfhoster11 5y ago

I definitely own my Linux desktop. I still have to accept auto-updates to stay secure, but I trust these random software authors not to screw me over infinitely more than I'd trust Microsoft or Google.

brainwipe 5y ago
I understand the issue of trust. I think my point still stands. You don't really own it unless you're doing the kernel fixes yourself.

mullen 5y ago

My phone and TV continue to work doing their primary job if I don't have them attached to the Internet. My Google Pixel 5 Pro will continue to operate as a phone only if it is removed from Internet and unable to install updates or check into the Google Mothership. Same with my Sony TV. Yes, they lose some functionality because they are not on the Internet but I would expect that because those functionalities require the Internet. However, my car should always work as a car, even without Internet access or ever checking with the Car Manufacturer Mothership. Yes, I can expect mapping feature to not work, but when I start my car, it should always start.

brainwipe 5y ago
But if the phone network decides to change how connections are made you decide not to update your phone, it won't work. 1G is deprecated. 2G has 11 years left in it in the UK. If you don't get your car serviced; it will cease to work and servicing will require updates. In most modern cars you are beholden to specialist knowledge to do that. I agree with your trust issue but I think we already trust technology companies for many parts of our lives.

nix0n 5y ago

"Feature phones" exist, Linux PCs exist, non-smart TVs exist (all of these come with tradeoffs). The difference is, in some places, it is not possible to own a new car. One of those places is the USA, where you miss out on a lot if you don't have access to a car.

brainwipe 5y ago
Linux is still updated by someone that isn't you. Even "old" cars require specialist knowledge. You're still beholden to someone else. The difference is now you're being asked to trust someone new.

kkfx 5y ago

My phone so far can't kill me, at least it's extremely unlikely, "my" car if does not obey a command might kill me or kill someone else leaving me as responsible for that. That's an important difference. Also my phone need a certain level of complexity "my" car have NO REASON to from my own personal perspective: I do not need a connected car. I do not need a car where the OEM have the control and I have not. Such choice for cars are made for the sake of OEM, of surveillance capitalism, not for end users. Also I do my best NOT using "my phone" exactly because of the crappy crap it is, I'll do my best to be desktop-bound, FLOSS desktop, I can't do much for UEFI and other fw crap, but at least they are less invasive and untrustable that Android/iOS. For me, for cars and social evolution in general there is only one option: a big push from the people that mandate open hardware and free software making surveillance so heavily punished that no one have interest to steer in that direction.

brainwipe 5y ago
It's true that a car can kill and that is an important difference but I don't think that is what's new here. What appears to be new is you're being asked to trust something new. My heating system can kill me and my family. I trust the engineer to do a good job. That's no different to my car. My 2006 Yaris has a computer that could cause the engine to explode. The engineers where my car is serviced have must trust. But truly, in either of those cases my ownership is beholden to others. I don't truly own it without support from others. Your FLOSS desktop will receive updates from people you don't know. So the difference here is trust. I completely agree with the social evolution statement; that is inevitable.