When I buy a phone or computer, I should be able to install what software I want, from whatever sources I want, on it. My device, my risk.
I don't think that that should be a contentious policy position.
@neil when I buy a car I should be able to install any parts I want, my car my risk.
Their exist other people on the road, and on the Internet.
@ekg People's choice of OS doesn't affect other devices, without the active intervention of a malicious actor... either a third-party, or the user themselves... so that's a pretty bad comparison...
@WolvericCatkin you can say the same thing about most things on a car as well.
Allowing a mail server to spread malicious software isn't a good idea.
@ekg A mail server is a very different question to end-user devices... plus, once again that argument falls apart because that mail server is almost certainly going to be based on Linux or a BSD fork, which is the height of openness in software choice...
@WolvericCatkin their exist nothing preventing you from installing a mail server on a "end-user device".
Their exist nothing not open about installing a giant pole without a flag on a car as well.
@ekg Apple Silicon does a pretty good job of preventing people from installing a mail server on end-user devices...
@WolvericCatkin okay, how does Apple being shity change my argument? You as an owner should be responsible for what you install on your computer.
@ekg Yes, and that shouldn't prevent you from running what you like on it...
@WolvericCatkin the same way car manufacturers shouldn't prevent you from repairing, or modifying your car. My comparison is still looking pretty good.
@ekg Your original post seemed to suggest people's software choices could directly hurt other people...
@WolvericCatkin yes, that is correct. People's choice of software could kill people.
@WolvericCatkin on phone or pc too. Their exist plenty of so called end-user devices in life critical settings.
An extreme/contrived example: installing this third-party app on my phone prevented my partner from calling 911.
And if the answer to that is "the phone shouldn't let apps do that", then we've already established that there is a threshold by which the user should not be allowed to install certain apps.
@ekg@social.librem.one @WolvericCatkin@tech.lgbt and you know what? Industry can't regulate itself. Why trust Apple to enforce that? Do you trust Ford to make sure there's no unsafe modifications? Of fucking course not. People should be held liable for their own decisions.
@ekg@social.librem.one @WolvericCatkin@tech.lgbt Certainly John Deere doesn't make anyone safer by making it nearly impossible to repair your tractor without their special software. So many stories... their parts are not readily available. Tesla doesn't make anyone safer by refusing to give people parts for their cars. I remember a couple years back watching a guy who just went to scrap yards and collected Tesla parts because while he was an authorized repair person or whatever most of the time they wouldn't ship the parts. We're not talking shit like new battery packs or motors, just minor items like a fucking sun visor. If the sun hits you in the eyes just right while driving you can't see. That is more likely to kill someone than a person running some malware on their phone. You could run a mail server on your phone (assuming android) via termux (and probably a proot environment within termux). I think this is a bad argument. I'm pro right to repair for both cars and electronics. Did you know my 2005 wasn't required to have a rev limiter? So I'd redline my engine sometimes causing premature wear. A simple modification would have made my vehicle a lot more durable. It's not a safety issue.
@ekg@social.librem.one @WolvericCatkin@tech.lgbt If someone replaces their own tires and they don't tighten the lug nuts... say the wheels fly off on the highway... when insurance is there and everything is all said and done yeah they'd be held liable for that. the government doesn't need to require subaru to check my lug nuts for me. (arguably car inspections are a good safety measure, but that's not from car manufacturers that's from the government)
@puppygirlhornypost2 @WolvericCatkin why are you being oppositional?, we seem to argue from the same perspective.
@ekg@social.librem.one @WolvericCatkin@tech.lgbt i originally read your statement as being against having freedom on devices. now im even more confused
@ekg@social.librem.one @WolvericCatkin@tech.lgbt i guess what got me was the comments about the mail server - i thought you were against companies opening up their ecosystem because people might be put at risk from others. entirely misread.
@puppygirlhornypost2 @WolvericCatkin I have been reliable informed that people that make car analogies are commonly assholes.
@ekg Not for a phone/PC...