4 ms·

This is a very bad argument. There are several, very easy to imagine mechanisms that both provide user freedom and security/idiot-resistance at the same time.

This is a very bad argument. There are several, very easy to imagine mechanisms that both provide user freedom and security/idiot-resistance at the same time. For instance, extending the "parental control" feature to have a toggle for sideloading - then, you just turn on parental control, toggle that off, and keep the PIN. Done. The idea that the features of the product should completely unnecessarily be restricted for all users for the dubious benefit of a tiny subset of them is laughable. The only logically consistent motive to advocate for this is profit.

chaostheory 4y ago
Uniformity and convention over configuration and customization is why people feel why iOS is more stable and secure than the Android ecosystem as a whole. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it.
- hinkley 4y ago
  You make your trade offs or you get another vendor to copy the features you like and not the ones you don’t. Forcing everything to be homogenous is something you’re meant to grow out of when you’re eight, once you see that ruining things for other people because you’re jealous is a bad personality trait.
  - chaostheory 4y ago
    > Forcing everything to be homogenous is something you’re meant to grow out of when you’re eight, once you see that ruining things for other people because you’re jealous is a bad personality trait. No one is forcing “everything to be homogenous”. If you don’t like homogeneity, then avoid it. It’s not hard to understand. My choices are none of your business just like I’m not going to criticize you for wanting more freedom to customize your device at the expense of security and stability.
- throw10920 4y ago
  > If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. Very, very bad and consumer-hostile sentiment that is inconsistent both with good ethics and with the way that the regulatory system works currently. Regulations on goods sold exist for a purpose - to allow the user to generally buy things while having some guarantees about their lifetime/security/safety/consistency with marketing/etc. "If you don't like it, don't buy it" implies that companies should be able to sell goods made with toxic substances, not honor their warranties, lie on their marketing, and steal and sell your personal medical information. This is bad. If I buy a product, I expect to be able to do whatever I want with it, and to not have arbitrary limitations on how I use that product that exist purely for the sake of making the seller more rich, and this is consistent with the way that consumer protection regulations work in general. > Uniformity and convention over configuration and customization is why people feel why iOS is more stable and secure than the Android ecosystem as a whole. False. The vast majority of people have no opinions of whether Android or iOS is more secure. Slightly more, but very few, of them have any opinions on their relative stability, and you can attribute exactly all of that instability to a mix between (1) manufacturers making terrible drivers and support packages for their hardware and (2) Google being generally bad at designing software. It has nothing to do with "uniformity" or "convention over configuration" at all.
  - chaostheory 4y ago
    We have a free market. No one is forcing you to buy products you don’t like. You’re confusing government sanctioned duopolies (created from bad regulation) like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T for Apple. You are free to buy alternative products from other companies. > It has nothing to do with "uniformity" or "convention over configuration" at all. Actually it does. The hardware is uniform and consistent, and therefore so are the drivers. There is a price to choice. Google is also one of the best software companies in the world.
    - t00 4y ago
      About that free market - it might be free but lobbying culture in the US starts early, at school where Apple pushes products to influence future choices of students. Not choosing something which is used by everyone around is probably more difficult psychologically than standing up to the status quo and choosing alternatives whatever they are. There are choices made for use - having a phone on which everyone around communicates, having an internet connection from the only provider in the area. Uniformity is a choice if the alternative is a viable choice and this is a complex matter.
judge2020 4y ago
Ultimate Security in the form of preventing extremely sophisticated physical access/evil maid attacks[0] benefits people even if they don't think they need this security. Maybe purchase a different product that more closely aligns with your needs. 0: ie. someone watches you enter your apple id and passcode and later swipes your phone, only to sideload spyware that hides itself from the UI, then re-plants your phone without you knowing
- Aeolun 4y ago
  That’s not a treat model 99% of users have to think about.
  - shagie 4y ago
    My I introduce you to Mr. Fart and his favorite colors? https://medium.com/@blakeross/mr-fart-s-favorite-colors-3177a406c775#.4b6z856uh https://medium.com/@blakeross/mr-fart-s-favorite-colors-3177... Discussed previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11231631 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11231631
    - throw10920 4y ago
      I don't see how this is relevant. Nobody is advocating for the relaxations of the iOS security model itself, which is the actual thing that prevents rootkits and malware on your device. Instead, the proposal is that people be able to install whatever software they want, that runs as a normal iOS app subject to the iOS security restrictions. Being able to install a non-Apple-approved app does not give you the ability to read and write arbitrary kernel memory, or do other actually dangerous things.
- throw10920 4y ago
  > Ultimate Security in the form of preventing extremely sophisticated physical access/evil maid attacks[0] benefits people even if they don't think they need this security. Yet, it's up to me to decide whether I want that security or whether I want to trade security for freedom/flexibility. Not you, or any other authoritarians seeking to exert control over others. > Maybe purchase a different product that more closely aligns with your needs. This is an incredibly toxic and user-hostile sentiment that also is completely inconsistent with the way that consumer protection laws work in general[1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33978141 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33978141

chaostheory 4y ago

Uniformity and convention over configuration and customization is why people feel why iOS is more stable and secure than the Android ecosystem as a whole. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it.

hinkley 4y ago
You make your trade offs or you get another vendor to copy the features you like and not the ones you don’t. Forcing everything to be homogenous is something you’re meant to grow out of when you’re eight, once you see that ruining things for other people because you’re jealous is a bad personality trait.
- chaostheory 4y ago
  > Forcing everything to be homogenous is something you’re meant to grow out of when you’re eight, once you see that ruining things for other people because you’re jealous is a bad personality trait. No one is forcing “everything to be homogenous”. If you don’t like homogeneity, then avoid it. It’s not hard to understand. My choices are none of your business just like I’m not going to criticize you for wanting more freedom to customize your device at the expense of security and stability.
throw10920 4y ago
> If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. Very, very bad and consumer-hostile sentiment that is inconsistent both with good ethics and with the way that the regulatory system works currently. Regulations on goods sold exist for a purpose - to allow the user to generally buy things while having some guarantees about their lifetime/security/safety/consistency with marketing/etc. "If you don't like it, don't buy it" implies that companies should be able to sell goods made with toxic substances, not honor their warranties, lie on their marketing, and steal and sell your personal medical information. This is bad. If I buy a product, I expect to be able to do whatever I want with it, and to not have arbitrary limitations on how I use that product that exist purely for the sake of making the seller more rich, and this is consistent with the way that consumer protection regulations work in general. > Uniformity and convention over configuration and customization is why people feel why iOS is more stable and secure than the Android ecosystem as a whole. False. The vast majority of people have no opinions of whether Android or iOS is more secure. Slightly more, but very few, of them have any opinions on their relative stability, and you can attribute exactly all of that instability to a mix between (1) manufacturers making terrible drivers and support packages for their hardware and (2) Google being generally bad at designing software. It has nothing to do with "uniformity" or "convention over configuration" at all.
- chaostheory 4y ago
  We have a free market. No one is forcing you to buy products you don’t like. You’re confusing government sanctioned duopolies (created from bad regulation) like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T for Apple. You are free to buy alternative products from other companies. > It has nothing to do with "uniformity" or "convention over configuration" at all. Actually it does. The hardware is uniform and consistent, and therefore so are the drivers. There is a price to choice. Google is also one of the best software companies in the world.
  - t00 4y ago
    About that free market - it might be free but lobbying culture in the US starts early, at school where Apple pushes products to influence future choices of students. Not choosing something which is used by everyone around is probably more difficult psychologically than standing up to the status quo and choosing alternatives whatever they are. There are choices made for use - having a phone on which everyone around communicates, having an internet connection from the only provider in the area. Uniformity is a choice if the alternative is a viable choice and this is a complex matter.

judge2020 4y ago

Ultimate Security in the form of preventing extremely sophisticated physical access/evil maid attacks[0] benefits people even if they don't think they need this security. Maybe purchase a different product that more closely aligns with your needs. 0: ie. someone watches you enter your apple id and passcode and later swipes your phone, only to sideload spyware that hides itself from the UI, then re-plants your phone without you knowing

Aeolun 4y ago
That’s not a treat model 99% of users have to think about.
- shagie 4y ago
  My I introduce you to Mr. Fart and his favorite colors? https://medium.com/@blakeross/mr-fart-s-favorite-colors-3177a406c775#.4b6z856uh https://medium.com/@blakeross/mr-fart-s-favorite-colors-3177... Discussed previously: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11231631 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11231631
  - throw10920 4y ago
    I don't see how this is relevant. Nobody is advocating for the relaxations of the iOS security model itself, which is the actual thing that prevents rootkits and malware on your device. Instead, the proposal is that people be able to install whatever software they want, that runs as a normal iOS app subject to the iOS security restrictions. Being able to install a non-Apple-approved app does not give you the ability to read and write arbitrary kernel memory, or do other actually dangerous things.
throw10920 4y ago
> Ultimate Security in the form of preventing extremely sophisticated physical access/evil maid attacks[0] benefits people even if they don't think they need this security. Yet, it's up to me to decide whether I want that security or whether I want to trade security for freedom/flexibility. Not you, or any other authoritarians seeking to exert control over others. > Maybe purchase a different product that more closely aligns with your needs. This is an incredibly toxic and user-hostile sentiment that also is completely inconsistent with the way that consumer protection laws work in general[1]. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33978141 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33978141