3 ms·
Nor have I. But I'm afraid you're not getting it. The point is that the technical means for control have already been demonstrated by iOS, not that anybody is
by slackdog 4y ago
Nor have I. But I'm afraid you're not getting it.
The point is that the technical means for control have already been demonstrated by iOS, not that anybody is forced to use iOS specifically. Governments could require that Google and other manufacturers implement similar controls. The walls of this sort of prison have already been designed and shown to work, all that remains is the political will to herd people in and lock the gates.
- zirgs 4y agoLocked down computing devices existed well before before the iPhone was a thing. Pretty much all gaming consoles are locked down. I'm fine with them existing as long as a non-locked down option is available. And controls like that would mean death to open source OSes like Linux, because you can't develop and test an operating system on a locked down device.
- slackdog 4y agoYou're still not getting it. iOS and the locked down game consoles that preceded it all demonstrate the technical feasibility of these controls. All that prevents it is political policy. I didn't say iOS was the first to do it. I didn't say that you are presently forced to buy such devices. And I certainly didn't say that desktop Linux would survive the sort of totalitarianism the tech industry has invented the means to implement. You're missing the point so severely that it's hard for me to understand where my explanations could be falling short. Are you trying to get a rise out of me?
- int_19h 4y agoThe other thing that iOS demonstrated is that not only it is technically feasible, it is also socially feasible - to the point where the majority of people willingly use such devices in some countries.