| |
| ▲ | kevincox 3 days ago | parent [-] | | Maybe, but it exists now. Maybe if more people demanded this hardware then it would be more popular and not at risk of extinction. I don't know what rhetoric you are taking about? Recommending buying stuff that supports your wishes seems like pretty reasonable advice. | | |
| ▲ | orbital-decay 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Voting with your wallet doesn't work when the overwhelming majority does want to be locked up. | | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Maybe it is not that they want to be locked up, but they are clueless / don't care. It sucks when the reason for why we can't have nice things is... the majority of people, doesn't it? In politics they would just say democracy at work, and believe me, people are just as clueless about that as they are with technology / privacy / security. | | |
| ▲ | orbital-decay 2 days ago | parent [-] | | In this very thread you can see really smart technologists largely praising this. Those aren't random Joes, and they have pretty convincing arguments - it really does improve security (and for some people, physical safety). Apple always makes very convincing points and plausible cases which are truly hard to argue against, when it takes away any kind of control from the users for their own good. This doesn't change the fact that you're being gradually locked up, though. | | |
| ▲ | dns_snek 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | | Just to be clear, I don't think security improvements like this are the problem, they're genuinely welcome and appreciated. The problem is when this technology is weaponized against us by removing the escape hatches to stifle our freedoms, but that's a separate independent decision. GrapheneOS makes similar security improvements, but it doesn't lock the escape hatches or stifle our freedoms. I could still root my device if I wanted to (although this is not recommended) and I can turn exploit protections off and customize the level of enforcement in detail, per-app, if I want/need to. | |
| ▲ | johnisgood 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Truth be told, I do not know that much about Apple, I have no clue what their reasonings are, but you have heard of the old and tiring "think of the children" one, for example. Seemingly it seems benign and way too many fall for it, unfortunately. No one wants to seem, or even feel evil about themselves. Can you give me any references to Apple's convincing points I could read about? I wonder if it is something akin to that, or "anti-terrorism". We have to take away your freedom in the name of national security, fighting terrorism, and protecting our children, as it is the case in the political sphere. | |
| ▲ | userbinator 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | s/smart/authoritarian/ |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | dns_snek 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | | > I don't know what rhetoric you are taking about. The rhetoric of blaming consumers for buying the wrong product when they complain about hostile features on Apple's side of the duopoly, and then blaming them again when they switch to Android and complain about hostile features on that side. The rhetoric of blaming the consumers for simply "not demanding" what we want with enough conviction. It's an asinine thing to suggest because freedom to install and customize has been the headline feature of Android since day 1, but they're killing it anyway because the duopoly doesn't give a shit about what we want. They know that they can make more money and they know that we don't have a choice. > Recommending buying stuff that supports your wishes seems like pretty reasonable advice. No, not when the market is a well-known abusive duopoly. That's either ignorant of the reality or just gaslighting. | | |
| ▲ | kevincox 2 days ago | parent [-] | | Fair point. I think in general it is important to remember that. There are negatives to each corner of the market so a consumer can't make a perfect choice. But in this specific case I think it does still seem strange to raise a concern that one of the most notorious locked down vendors is shipping a security improvement because it also makes it harder to get full device access. Maybe a better way of phrasing my point is that the problem isn't that these devices are secure, that is a good feature. The problem is that Apple doesn't let you control the device. I would focus my complaints on the latter, not complain about every security improvement because it also happens to contribute to the real problem. |
|
|
|
