4 ms·

The thing is, freedom of speech, movement, etc. are much more obvious to non-technical people than freedom to run arbitrary software. I think it's sort of offen

The thing is, freedom of speech, movement, etc. are much more obvious to non-technical people than freedom to run arbitrary software. I think it's sort of offensive to imply that because someone isn't aware of the implications of the app store, they aren't a "thinking person". There is no risk of being rounded up and sent to a labour camp for re-education because you jailbroke your iPhone. I'm not really sure where you're going with the possession thing, that's pretty much just a hand-wavey aphorism. Obviously possessing stolen property is not 90% legal. I agree with you generally, that we as technical people and experts need to be aware of, and create awareness of, these issues. I think you're falling into the same trap as RMS, which is to get absurd about the abstract notion of freedom, without making change attainable or actionable for the average user. If you want to have a massive shift in user attitudes towards the App store, you're not going to achieve that by comparing Apple to China. Nor can you simply 'dismiss them as absurd', because you're alienating your audience: they think Apple is reasonable. What I liked about Sir Tim here was that he makes the argument pretty reasonably: it sucks that apps aren't cross-platform, that you have to depend on a proprietary interface to save them, share them with other users, etc. He makes it relatable in the present, he doesn't just fall back on the dystopian slippery-slope argument.

vy8vWJlco 14y ago
"There is no risk of being rounded up and sent to a labour camp for re-education because you jailbroke your iPhone." :| ISP/Youtube (etc) copyright school, anti-circumvention laws, three/six strikes, the CFAA, etc... Prison often involves "public service"/forced labour. To people agreeing with those articulations it even seems "just": surely criminals deserve what they get (people even seem OK with rape, as long as it happens to a murderer). To people who don't agree with the current imaginary property laws, there's no practical difference between the threat of prison and the threat of a prison "camp." Suicide might even feel like a viable alternative. I know memory is short, but that was basically the front page for about a week, and only as long ago. "I think it's sort of offensive to imply that because someone isn't aware of the implications of the app store, they aren't a 'thinking person'." That wasn't my meaning nor was I trying to be offensive, only blunt. None the less, an uninformed person who bases his opinion on an average of the public's opinion, going no further, is abdicating thought, and can be accurately called "unthinking." (Obligatory Socrates reference... "I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know.") "I'm not really sure where you're going with the possession thing[...]" Simply but strongly: that it's not worth spending money on something you don't ultimately control (be it stocks, socks, tablets, or smartphones; don't buy shares in dictatorships either, even if they are going up: you're only betting that they will win). Everyone has that choice, and it is as important as ever. Save your money for freedom. Wikipedia: "Possession is nine-tenths of the law is an expression meaning that ownership is easier to maintain if one has possession of something, and much more difficult to enforce if one does not." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_the_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_t... ) Now is the most effective time to hang onto that presumption of control, since it's harder to get back when it's gone. "he doesn't just fall back on the dystopian slippery-slope argument." It's an oldie, but a goodie. While I wish it weren't applicable, I do foresee a dystopian future, at least compared to the present, where we have sold the "right-of-way" to the devices and data that augment and define us for brushed metal and an Apple logo (not to single out any one company). At least give me a bit of credit though: I didn't once mention Hitler. :) Edit: I'm not trying to be combative. As you said, we mostly agree.

vy8vWJlco 14y ago

"There is no risk of being rounded up and sent to a labour camp for re-education because you jailbroke your iPhone." :| ISP/Youtube (etc) copyright school, anti-circumvention laws, three/six strikes, the CFAA, etc... Prison often involves "public service"/forced labour. To people agreeing with those articulations it even seems "just": surely criminals deserve what they get (people even seem OK with rape, as long as it happens to a murderer). To people who don't agree with the current imaginary property laws, there's no practical difference between the threat of prison and the threat of a prison "camp." Suicide might even feel like a viable alternative. I know memory is short, but that was basically the front page for about a week, and only as long ago. "I think it's sort of offensive to imply that because someone isn't aware of the implications of the app store, they aren't a 'thinking person'." That wasn't my meaning nor was I trying to be offensive, only blunt. None the less, an uninformed person who bases his opinion on an average of the public's opinion, going no further, is abdicating thought, and can be accurately called "unthinking." (Obligatory Socrates reference... "I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know.") "I'm not really sure where you're going with the possession thing[...]" Simply but strongly: that it's not worth spending money on something you don't ultimately control (be it stocks, socks, tablets, or smartphones; don't buy shares in dictatorships either, even if they are going up: you're only betting that they will win). Everyone has that choice, and it is as important as ever. Save your money for freedom. Wikipedia: "Possession is nine-tenths of the law is an expression meaning that ownership is easier to maintain if one has possession of something, and much more difficult to enforce if one does not." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_the_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possession_is_nine-tenths_of_t... ) Now is the most effective time to hang onto that presumption of control, since it's harder to get back when it's gone. "he doesn't just fall back on the dystopian slippery-slope argument." It's an oldie, but a goodie. While I wish it weren't applicable, I do foresee a dystopian future, at least compared to the present, where we have sold the "right-of-way" to the devices and data that augment and define us for brushed metal and an Apple logo (not to single out any one company). At least give me a bit of credit though: I didn't once mention Hitler. :) Edit: I'm not trying to be combative. As you said, we mostly agree.