Finally someone is fighting those companies that take advantage of controlling the platforms.
this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2023
586 points (97.9% liked)
Technology
57432 readers
3616 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
good.
Can't happen soon enough. Personally, I'd wish this would go much further and would allow every device to be flashable, with only a few exceptions for safety, like cars.
There's also a certain irony that certain other places will go to bat for right to repair, and then turn around and say "Actually, I want to live in a walled garden.", not realizing that these are two sides of the same coin.
with only a few exceptions for safety, like cars.
No. There are three main bullshit arguments being used by lobbyists actively making the world a worse place by fighting against this type of legislation.
- safety and security
- intellectual propery rights
- hindering innovation
All three are demonstrably used in hearings to convince legislators to not sign right to repair bills into law. And all three are absolute bullshit.
Replacing the brakes on your own car is not generally seen as introducing safety risks, so why would software be any different? The only things that actually make cars safe are competent drivers (wether flesh and bone, or digital) and proper manufacturing (so no malfunctioning during use).
There is a reason full self driving is not legal in most places worldwide, and likely won't be for a very long time. We've seen too many examples of software fuck ups and the legal responsibility in case of an accident is still a difficult part of the equation.
If we're able to integrate full infotainment systems into cars, and all kinds of AI gadgets for driving assistance. We should be able to make cars safer even if the software is user servicable.
No more gatekeeping bullshit.
Good point.
with only a few exceptions for safety, like cars.
Safety means extra-flashable.
Yeah man, can't wait to be sharing the road with people running custom ROMs on their 2 ton death machine. People are well known for being responsible in situations like that.
Quite frankly why the hell should I trust any publicly traded automaker to flash quality software?
Some of them have a track record for quantifying the cost of fixing an issue versus cost of settling lawsuits for that unfixed issue killing people.
Why would I trust an unaccountable rando with the same thing? One has a brand they need to uphold, and are liable for any kind of damages caused by their firmware.
When Joe Shmo crashes his soft-modded Honda Civic into a crowd of people, who's going to pay for the damage and lawsuits, etc.?
because roadways are so safe and free from accidents as is.
Right, exactly. We don't need more.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(12 replies)
How about Apple laptops next, including specs to write drivers.
Also how about not forcing everybody to use Apple hardware to compile their apps? How about allowing xcode competititors and running on different hardware? Allowing to emulate macos/ios?
Fuck apple.
Also how about not forcing everybody to use Apple hardware to compile their apps?
It's a thing? Can't you just gcc binary into existence?
Fuck apple.
Fuck Putin. Fuck apple too.
In principle you can, the Mach-O format is openly documented and implemented in the major compilers. The issue is that you need a sysroot (aka SDK) of the frameworks and headers for your target OS, which in Apple's case are proprietary and cannot be redistributed legally (you could probably rip them out of a macOS installation yourself though). For iOS apps you'd also need to sign the binaries and install the app to the device which is non-trivial to impossible to do on other platforms.
load more comments
(1 replies)
including specs to write drivers.
Whoa, that's super strong move. I 100% support it. Sadly, I'm not in EU. Faust bless EU, they have really big potatoes.
I mean first you have to get politicians to understand what the hell a “driver” is, and no, Gretchen, it’s not Uber.
Lucky for you they would be super unlikely to change the hardware so much that you wouldn't benefit from "European" drivers in another region.
load more comments
(1 replies)
I would love to see the looks on the Apple execs' faces when they learn news like this. Those greedy cunts must get a rage boner every time they're forced to act like decent world citizens
Honestly, so long as people keep buying their phones they really don't care about this kind of stuff. Sure, it was a way to drive up margins for a while, but they will just move onto their next bag of tricks to make it hard to leave.
'Security' is apple's version of 'think of the children'.
I love that the company famous for their 1984 ad tells you they know what software’s best for you to run on a device you own. Very big brother. I really hope iOS 18 third party stores aren’t geo locked to the EU; I wouldn’t put it past them.
If the iPhone becomes flashable, I bet apple will try and make it very difficult for people to flash it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Can we start with RCS integration or opening the iMessage protocol?
Don't buy apple?
Ah, victory.
Apple's restrictions against consumers are the worst thing that ever happened to computing. It has been unconscionable for fifteen straight years.
Pre-emptive middle finger to inevitable 'just buy something else' trolls. Your computer should do what you want. There can be no wrong brand. It doesn't belong to the brand. It belongs to you. That's what the money was for.
view more: next ›