4 ms·

This principle seems out of touch with most people’s reality: products hardly ever do everything you want and often work against you. If someone has a device th

This principle seems out of touch with most people’s reality: products hardly ever do everything you want and often work against you. If someone has a device that doesn’t do what they want and there’s no setting to change its behavior, replacing it is usually the only practical option. (Or if it’s a problem with an app, they might be able to install a different app.) If there is a free software license, it’s of no direct use to them. Only software developers care about such things. (There is an indirect effect on what software is available.)

Ajedi32 2y ago
Yes, because we largely don't have Free Software. > If there is a free software license, it’s of no direct use to them. It's of indirect use; they could use a modified version of the software that does what they want, created by someone else. This is why you generally don't see user-hostile features in Free Software; someone would just fork the project and edit them out.
- skybrian 2y ago
  The problem is that some forks are malware [1], so switching to a fork by developers you don't know is risky. How do non-technical users learn which software developers to trust? [1] https://www.securityweek.com/malware-delivered-via-malicious-pidgin-plugin-signal-fork/ https://www.securityweek.com/malware-delivered-via-malicious...
  - Ajedi32 2y ago
    Worst-case, they could hire someone they trust to review the source code. More realistically, you generally don't have to switch to a fork in the first place because the mere threat of a fork is enough to prevent the deployment of user-hostile features. And when a project does get forked it's often a highly publicized affair with a lot of community drama which produces no shortage of information about who's trustworthy and who's not.
    - skybrian 2y ago
      This is only somewhat true for the software most popular with technical users - the sort of thing the average Hacker News reader might be familiar with. There is a long tail of malware in app stores, despite the efforts of app vendors to police such things. Nobody would be bothering to fork them because most technical users don't care about them, but they still attract lots of victims. Example: malicious Chrome extensions. Authors of Chrome extensions receive enticing offers to sell and sometimes they do.
      - Ajedi32 2y ago
        Yes, malware does exist in app stores. I don't really see how that's related to Free Software though? When I say user-hostile features I'm not talking about malware. Yes, I suppose theoretically you could fork a Free Software malware app and make it not-malware, but that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about things like Samsung putting ads on your TV home screen[1], or BMW charging a monthly subscription to access your car's seat heaters[2], or Sweden trying to install a backdoor in Signal. With Free Software, users get the final say on whether those features are installed on their devices or not. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/samsung/comments/184a1j6/why_do_i_have_ads_in_my_smart_tv/ https://www.reddit.com/r/samsung/comments/184a1j6/why_do_i_h... [2]: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
        skybrian 2y ago
        If malware isn’t user-hostile, I don’t know what is? It works both ways. A fork can fix something that’s user-hostile, but it can also introduce malware into an otherwise useful app that didn’t already have it, and many users won’t know which one to install. There’s no guarantee that any security researcher is watching. In practice we rely largely on reputation, and sometimes that’s the blind leading the blind. Users don’t get final say in what their devices do unless a software developer is willing and able to help them. Most are actually pretty helpless on their own.
        Ajedi32 2y ago
lolinder 2y ago
OP is not out of touch, OP is literally saying that this is happening and that it is a bad thing.
blueflow 2y ago
I can speak for german law: If you buy something, it becomes your property, and you have full power of disposal ("Verfügungsgewalt") over it. If vendors deny you from exercising this right, they are violating their part of the purchase contract.
- skybrian 2y ago
  Rights are of limited use if there's no practical way to exercise them. Hiring a software developer to change an OS or an app is rarely a practical option for most consumers.
  - blueflow 2y ago
    You can install Linuxor a custom ROM. And if the manufacturer has DRM like SecureBoot in place to prohibit that, you can file for damages and basically get the device for free.
  - Ajedi32 2y ago
    Correct. It's not practical because those apps usually aren't Free Software and because the hardware or firmware they're running on often aren't Free and include anti-features that prevent you from installing Free alternatives. If they were Free, users wouldn't necessarily even need to hire a developer to change their app or OS; those changes would most likely already exist in some form somewhere and the user could simply purchase the modified version.

Ajedi32 2y ago

Yes, because we largely don't have Free Software. > If there is a free software license, it’s of no direct use to them. It's of indirect use; they could use a modified version of the software that does what they want, created by someone else. This is why you generally don't see user-hostile features in Free Software; someone would just fork the project and edit them out.

skybrian 2y ago
The problem is that some forks are malware [1], so switching to a fork by developers you don't know is risky. How do non-technical users learn which software developers to trust? [1] https://www.securityweek.com/malware-delivered-via-malicious-pidgin-plugin-signal-fork/ https://www.securityweek.com/malware-delivered-via-malicious...
- Ajedi32 2y ago
  Worst-case, they could hire someone they trust to review the source code. More realistically, you generally don't have to switch to a fork in the first place because the mere threat of a fork is enough to prevent the deployment of user-hostile features. And when a project does get forked it's often a highly publicized affair with a lot of community drama which produces no shortage of information about who's trustworthy and who's not.
  - skybrian 2y ago
    This is only somewhat true for the software most popular with technical users - the sort of thing the average Hacker News reader might be familiar with. There is a long tail of malware in app stores, despite the efforts of app vendors to police such things. Nobody would be bothering to fork them because most technical users don't care about them, but they still attract lots of victims. Example: malicious Chrome extensions. Authors of Chrome extensions receive enticing offers to sell and sometimes they do.
    - Ajedi32 2y ago
      Yes, malware does exist in app stores. I don't really see how that's related to Free Software though? When I say user-hostile features I'm not talking about malware. Yes, I suppose theoretically you could fork a Free Software malware app and make it not-malware, but that's not what I'm talking about here. I'm talking about things like Samsung putting ads on your TV home screen[1], or BMW charging a monthly subscription to access your car's seat heaters[2], or Sweden trying to install a backdoor in Signal. With Free Software, users get the final say on whether those features are installed on their devices or not. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/samsung/comments/184a1j6/why_do_i_have_ads_in_my_smart_tv/ https://www.reddit.com/r/samsung/comments/184a1j6/why_do_i_h... [2]: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208 https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-62142208
      - skybrian 2y ago
        If malware isn’t user-hostile, I don’t know what is? It works both ways. A fork can fix something that’s user-hostile, but it can also introduce malware into an otherwise useful app that didn’t already have it, and many users won’t know which one to install. There’s no guarantee that any security researcher is watching. In practice we rely largely on reputation, and sometimes that’s the blind leading the blind. Users don’t get final say in what their devices do unless a software developer is willing and able to help them. Most are actually pretty helpless on their own.
        Ajedi32 2y ago

lolinder 2y ago

OP is not out of touch, OP is literally saying that this is happening and that it is a bad thing.

blueflow 2y ago

I can speak for german law: If you buy something, it becomes your property, and you have full power of disposal ("Verfügungsgewalt") over it. If vendors deny you from exercising this right, they are violating their part of the purchase contract.

skybrian 2y ago
Rights are of limited use if there's no practical way to exercise them. Hiring a software developer to change an OS or an app is rarely a practical option for most consumers.
- blueflow 2y ago
  You can install Linuxor a custom ROM. And if the manufacturer has DRM like SecureBoot in place to prohibit that, you can file for damages and basically get the device for free.
- Ajedi32 2y ago
  Correct. It's not practical because those apps usually aren't Free Software and because the hardware or firmware they're running on often aren't Free and include anti-features that prevent you from installing Free alternatives. If they were Free, users wouldn't necessarily even need to hire a developer to change their app or OS; those changes would most likely already exist in some form somewhere and the user could simply purchase the modified version.