TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

I want a computer that I own

994 pointsby bezelbuttonsabout 4 years ago

113 comments

kokxabout 4 years ago
I have a similar feeling, but with modern smartphones.<p>Owning my computer is still relatively possible. I can build a computer from parts which I can choose, and have a choice in which operating system to install on them. Laptops are slightly more closed, but even on those I can choose the OS myself.<p>Modern smartphones however, seem like walled gardens in which I have no control at all. I cannot choose any of the parts, and even doing simple reparation tasks like replacing a battery is a nightmare these days. I am locked into a single OS on my smartphone, which either spies on you or is locked down even more. Every iteration a bit more control is taken away from the user. And its increasingly hard to step away from them, since a lot of normal interactions such as banking almost requires you to have such a phone.<p>Both Android and iOS suck. I&#x27;ve made my own Android phone tolerable with F-Droid and trying to ungoogle it as much as possible. But unfortunately I find myself locked into using google play services since solutions like MicroG just don&#x27;t cut it. They lock me out of slightly too much of my daily smartphone usage (note that this is definitely not the MicroG&#x27;s developers fault, they have done amazing work).
评论 #26396582 未加载
评论 #26394395 未加载
评论 #26396270 未加载
评论 #26396860 未加载
评论 #26396840 未加载
评论 #26394408 未加载
评论 #26394916 未加载
评论 #26396343 未加载
评论 #26394064 未加载
评论 #26395266 未加载
评论 #26395298 未加载
评论 #26396242 未加载
评论 #26396557 未加载
评论 #26394185 未加载
评论 #26397079 未加载
评论 #26396679 未加载
评论 #26399033 未加载
评论 #26396714 未加载
评论 #26395355 未加载
评论 #26395115 未加载
评论 #26396155 未加载
评论 #26397139 未加载
评论 #26398276 未加载
评论 #26395009 未加载
评论 #26395491 未加载
评论 #26398691 未加载
评论 #26396862 未加载
评论 #26397430 未加载
评论 #26398589 未加载
评论 #26401943 未加载
评论 #26394929 未加载
评论 #26395420 未加载
评论 #26397019 未加载
评论 #26396176 未加载
评论 #26408958 未加载
评论 #26399872 未加载
评论 #26399107 未加载
评论 #26397550 未加载
评论 #26394477 未加载
评论 #26395257 未加载
评论 #26394210 未加载
评论 #26394327 未加载
BoysenberryPiabout 4 years ago
This feels like it was made to get to the top of somewhere like HN but I&#x27;m actually very confused.<p>&gt;I want it to be, but which can also be used to communicate securely with anyone on the planet without being observed by a third party. I don&#x27;t want to be spied on by Microsoft or Google.I don&#x27;t want the NSA intercepting my conversations or even their metadata.<p>I don&#x27;t see what this has to do with the actual computer honestly. You don&#x27;t want Microsoft to be involved so I&#x27;m going to assume you are going to install Linux on whatever you get, awesome, this doesn&#x27;t stop the NSA or Google from harvesting your data because that doesn&#x27;t really have anything with the computer. Seems like you want a search engine and ISP that you own as well.
评论 #26395018 未加载
评论 #26397226 未加载
评论 #26394461 未加载
评论 #26396241 未加载
评论 #26394795 未加载
koverdaabout 4 years ago
&gt; Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can&#x27;t afford to buy.<p>This statement here made me pause for a bit. He wants a computer with specific features, but doesn&#x27;t want pay for the models that offer those features because they are too expensive?<p>Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too, but unfortunately, reality has constraints.
评论 #26394244 未加载
评论 #26394618 未加载
评论 #26395289 未加载
评论 #26394137 未加载
评论 #26394052 未加载
评论 #26394170 未加载
评论 #26394159 未加载
评论 #26398850 未加载
评论 #26394050 未加载
aiisahikabout 4 years ago
This is literally something that NEVER crosses the mind of the average consumer. We should have a HackerNews version of &quot;first world problems&quot; and call it &quot;HackerNews Problems&quot;.<p>You now have a computer that is 10,000 times faster than one you had 30 yrs ago at half the price. Oh and it fits in your pocket. A lot of time and money went into creating that. Those people need to get paid. And yes you pay for it with some loss of privacy.<p>The reason why this product doesn&#x27;t existing on the market is because because NOBODY (except the odd 4000 people on HN) wants this product. Most people don&#x27;t even use a VPN or know what TOR is. If you don&#x27;t want it, then design and fab your own chips and write your own software from scratch.
评论 #26397331 未加载
评论 #26394552 未加载
评论 #26394462 未加载
评论 #26396200 未加载
评论 #26396621 未加载
评论 #26395943 未加载
评论 #26396335 未加载
评论 #26397928 未加载
评论 #26396797 未加载
评论 #26398630 未加载
评论 #26409544 未加载
评论 #26394587 未加载
评论 #26396261 未加载
cat_plus_plusabout 4 years ago
It&#x27;s nice to want things, the question is what are you willing to contribute or give up to get them. The author wants to be free of Microsoft and then says he wants something like DOS on x286. Well, DOS was not free of Microsoft. To really be sure corporations and government are not spying on you, you need 100% open source for all software and firmware, if not chip schematics. This means slower hardware and less software, because people don&#x27;t do as much work for free &#x2F; on donations vs paychecks paid by copyright royalties and ads (that can be easily stripped from open source). Want to keep your photos if you drop your phone into the lake? Well, then a copy is on someone&#x27;s servers. Want traffic information in your map app? Someone knows where you have been driving then.<p>Running desktop&#x2F;laptop Linux is a relatively minor sacrifice in terms of available software, especially if you consider Wine and Steam emulation. Yet market share is tiny. People do not seem to own a computer enough to do anything about it.
评论 #26396471 未加载
marcodiegoabout 4 years ago
You can have computers that you own today. There is a list here: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ryf.fsf.org&#x2F;categories&#x2F;laptops" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ryf.fsf.org&#x2F;categories&#x2F;laptops</a> .<p>If you want something more powerful, there&#x27;re these:<p><pre><code> - https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ryf.fsf.org&#x2F;categories&#x2F;workstations-and-servers - https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ryf.fsf.org&#x2F;categories&#x2F;mainboards </code></pre> Also, Andrius Stikonas achieved a blob-free fully functioning (AFAIK) RockPro64 more than a year ago: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stikonas.eu&#x2F;wordpress&#x2F;2019&#x2F;09&#x2F;15&#x2F;blobless-boot-with-rockpro64&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;stikonas.eu&#x2F;wordpress&#x2F;2019&#x2F;09&#x2F;15&#x2F;blobless-boot-with-...</a><p>People have to vote with their wallets and pressure vendors.
评论 #26394933 未加载
评论 #26394352 未加载
评论 #26399012 未加载
评论 #26394411 未加载
评论 #26400376 未加载
评论 #26394356 未加载
MaxBarracloughabout 4 years ago
So they&#x27;ve independently discovered the tenets of the Free Software movement. They make valid points, but that&#x27;s all they&#x27;ve done. I&#x27;m surprised there&#x27;s no mention of this in the comments here.<p>&gt; I must rely on encryption algorithms that are designed with subtle flaws that can take years, if not decades, to come to light.<p>Cryptography is an extremely technical field, so yes, you do. That&#x27;s not really relevant to the matter of truly owning your computer. If you want to personally validate modern theoretical physics, that would also take years of study.<p>&gt; Even open source encryption algorithms that some claim are above reproach are repeatedly being shown to have major flaws, and the fixes to those flaws have their own major flaws.<p>Again, a separate issue. That&#x27;s not a matter of having a computer you truly own, that&#x27;s a matter of software quality.<p>&gt; Will this ever end? Will I ever have a computer that I own?<p>They pose this question as if it&#x27;s a rhetorical one. The Free Software movement already exists. You can support it with code contributions, documentation, testing effort, money, or advocacy&#x2F;activism. See [0]. If you don&#x27;t like the FSF specifically, you can support other initiatives.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fsf.org&#x2F;about&#x2F;ways-to-donate&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.fsf.org&#x2F;about&#x2F;ways-to-donate&#x2F;</a>
walrus01about 4 years ago
&gt; Perhaps I am looking for something like the x286 DOS computer I had in the early 1990&#x27;s<p>You can do an almost fully GPL compliant Linux desktop by building it yourself today. I can already see people thinking &quot;but what about the closed source binary blobs? my video card? my network interfaces?&quot;<p>But even your 12 MHz 286 or 386SX&#x2F;20 had closed source AMI or Phoenix BIOS firmware on it. The motherboard manufacturer in Taiwan and American Megatrends sure weren&#x27;t handing out the source code to that. And if you had a video card, or a soundblaster, its drivers loaded in config.sys were also closed binary blobs.
评论 #26394527 未加载
评论 #26394214 未加载
评论 #26394279 未加载
评论 #26394765 未加载
评论 #26394500 未加载
bjarnehabout 4 years ago
&gt; Governments seem to be universally terrified of even the slightest possibility of anyone in the world having a private conversation.<p>We used to make fun of the countries behind the iron curtain for their lack privacy. The thought of living in a surveillance state seemed horrible as well as unrealistic in &quot;the west&quot;. Freedom &#x2F; democracy loving people like us would never have that kind of problem. Now it seems the whole world has gone mad, and it seems that people looking for privacy, are just considered as people looking to do something terrible that the state needs to stop anyway.
julienb_seaabout 4 years ago
There are approaches that can deliver large portions of this; run an open source linux distribution, running open source browser with open source tracker blocking software. You can run this on an inexpensive system and wipe out all external communication except what you specifically want.<p>This is obviously unrealistic for most people. You can toggle off automatic feedback &amp; updates in a modern OS and you can install Firefox with tracker blocking and you are 99% of the way there, plenty enough in practice.<p>I want to point out both of these approaches introduce legitimate security holes (either from not using a production grade OS or from disabling updates on it) which are vastly more likely to have real impact on your life versus privacy tracking.
评论 #26394038 未加载
评论 #26395157 未加载
评论 #26393994 未加载
评论 #26395250 未加载
buzzertabout 4 years ago
&gt; Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can&#x27;t afford to buy, our computers are increasingly designed to be little more than advertising platforms and vehicles for maximizing the cloud revenues of their true owners<p>Huh? You can buy a very cheap used ThinkPad for &lt;$200 and run GNU&#x2F;Linux on it. In fact, I don’t see any mention of Linux in this article.
评论 #26394232 未加载
评论 #26394254 未加载
realsimplesyndabout 4 years ago
&gt; Governments seem to be universally terrified of even the slightest possibility of anyone in the world having a private conversation.<p>How secure do you think face-to-face conversations are? (not sarcastic or anything, just genuinely interested on measuring security of conversations)
评论 #26394166 未加载
评论 #26394190 未加载
评论 #26394385 未加载
gorgoilerabout 4 years ago
I felt this way about iPhone. My compromise was to only connect using a VPN. The goal wasn’t to keep my traffic private — it was so that I could have complete visibility and control over what the iPhone was talking to.<p>The idea was that my iPhone could be as nefarious as it wanted to be — it could never talk to anyone I didn’t want it to talk to because iptables stopped it, or something.<p>The project didn’t pan out, but I did end up using pihole a lot which felt like a good compromise.<p>I also discovered that iOS and cell carriers have a some kind of partnership to silently send each other text messages containing lots of unique looking identifiers, which was fun (REG-RESP?v=3&amp;r=...&amp;n=+555994321&amp;s=FB87CD658A...etc). I used a niche IOT carrier for a while that showed me the complete SMS logs, including all these messages being sent multiple times a day.<p>I’m sure there’s some banal engineering reason for it but it’s not exactly heartening to find “secret” text messages being snuck out, by the dozen.
评论 #26397155 未加载
teekertabout 4 years ago
My computers are cerebral prostheses. They are deeply personal, I know them, they know me. They are a part me. Without them I would have a different character. Please, indeed, allow me to have one that has me as it&#x27;s only priority.<p>In practice I strive for this. I run all the backend services I can get my hands on from my basement (Home Assistant, NextCloud). But getting to the 100% mark indeed seem impossible today without mayor inconveniences, compared to other people, in this time frame at least..
ternabout 4 years ago
I know how much HN loves Urbit &#x2F;s, but it&#x27;s the only attempt to create a computer that you can own that I&#x27;m aware of and (1) shows the scale of the endeavor and (2) proves it&#x27;s possible <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tlon.io&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;tlon.io&#x2F;</a>
评论 #26396566 未加载
sceleratabout 4 years ago
Who is going to make this mythical computer which neither benefits any government nor lines the pocket of any corporation? At a cost that makes it accessible to the author? Real question. Maybe it&#x27;s possible. Who&#x27;s going make it.<p>I think the best bet is for citizens of powerful and influential governments insist on legal privacy constraints for software and hardware manufacturers, as well as place limits on their own governments&#x27; snooping.
charlierothabout 4 years ago
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;urbit.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;urbit.org</a>
评论 #26394928 未加载
userbinatorabout 4 years ago
What I find rather puzzling is the increasing secrecy of hardware manufacturers; search the part numbers of all the ICs on a motherboard from the first IBM PC&#x2F;XT&#x2F;AT (for which schematics and BIOS source were available) up to the 486&#x2F;586 era, and chances are very good that you&#x27;ll find the full datasheets. Try that with a modern motherboard, however, and you may find that something as seemingly mundane as the CPU voltage regulator controller or temperature monitoring&#x2F;superIO has next to no public information available. Wouldn&#x27;t a company making data on how to use its products easily available be more likely to earn new customers and have better sales?
a5withtrrsabout 4 years ago
&gt; Our computers are increasingly designed to be little more than advertising platforms and vehicles for maximizing the cloud revenues of their true owners<p>This applies so much to modern Windows operating systems that it&#x27;s frankly disgusting. I think most phones are also solidly in this space as well.<p>Apple is marginally better, but their efforts to ram iCloud services down your throat at every available opportunity is pretty obvious as well. Plus the amount of things that mysteriously call home. On the plus side, they don&#x27;t actively send you ads baked into your lock screen or start menu.
评论 #26394423 未加载
runjakeabout 4 years ago
Build a PC and install Linux on it and be done with it.
评论 #26394101 未加载
评论 #26394376 未加载
评论 #26394532 未加载
oytisabout 4 years ago
&gt; Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can&#x27;t afford to buy, our computers are increasingly designed to be little more than advertising platforms and vehicles for maximizing the cloud revenues of their true owners.<p>I don&#x27;t quite get what the author is talking about. There are some concerns about what proprietary BIOS firmware does, but otherwise pretty much any PC on the market can run whatever software (including the OS) the user installs on them. Or can the author only afford a smartphone?
fengorabout 4 years ago
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mntre.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;reform_md&#x2F;2021-03-07-reform-production-update-mar-2021.html#news" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mntre.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;reform_md&#x2F;2021-03-07-reform-producti...</a><p>If you want to truly own your hardware I can recommend the mnt reform
评论 #26394543 未加载
评论 #26399932 未加载
murftownabout 4 years ago
For an article about privacy and not being snooped on, some HTTPS would be nice!<p>But then again, the author could understandably reply that TLS is an example of a system that has evolved to require &quot;checking in&quot; with a central authority - the opposite of what they want. So fair enough.
NiceWayToDoITabout 4 years ago
It is interesting thought, especially as few days back someone in HN wrote completely opposite view, that everything should be controlled and spied on (and for the love of universe I cannot find it again, it was on first page of HN I would appreciate link ...), because with progress we are becoming more powerful and more destructive - so any human in future with enough knowledge, would have ability to destroying entire humanity.<p>Where is the middle ground between those two ends?<p>Maybe it is similar to what we have now?
评论 #26396543 未加载
heterodyningabout 4 years ago
I want the search index of the early google age where it was less monetized and more accurate.<p>I want real information not force fed crap that is essentially information fast food causing type-2 terminal stupididty.<p>I want information without the built in addiction.
评论 #26394429 未加载
评论 #26395152 未加载
ho_schiabout 4 years ago
I understand the author. While I&#x27;m more suspicious about the hardware companies than the governments. But care about both. And look pure software companies, which try to sell you services instead of code, executable and support. When hardware- and software are integrated be extremely wary - usually you only get an appliance.<p>I try to follow these guidelines:<p>1.) Used and buy only general purpose computers, where you can swap hardware and operating-system. Or even better, firmware.<p>2.) Avoid Big Tech: Apple (literally all), Microsoft (Surface) and Google (Pixel)<p>3.) Laptops: Invest into vendors which allow all purpose computing or especiall Linux. Big ones are Lenovo and Dell, small ones are {System76, Purism, Tuxedo, ...}.<p>4.) Desktop: Built it yourself or order some from a shop which built it for you.<p>Actually the Pixel Phones are rather good. But Google is not better than Apple. Miracast is really complicated but good. Google? Disables Miracast in the Pixel phones and tries people to lure into Chromecast, which is inferior and requires practically always Internet. If you want send content two meters across the room you don&#x27;t want Internet! And Pushmail? Only with GMAIL on Pixel. We are in 2021 and this phones don&#x27;t provide Pushmail for IMAP servers which actually provide this feature. Even Apple is better there, and Apple also provides CalDAV and CardDAV. But Apples doesn&#x27;t provide file system access nor allow you to use your devics as you want!<p>Lenovo and Dell improved their Linux support a lot in recent years - so I consider them pretty positive. But nothing is perfect.<p>PS: Probably I receive downvotes because saying negative things about Apple is not well received here. Silicon Valley Clique?
adolphabout 4 years ago
What does it mean to own something? In the extreme, do you own anything that you don’t understand? In the extreme does owning something become a kind of performance art?<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ted.com&#x2F;talks&#x2F;thomas_thwaites_how_i_built_a_toaster_from_scratch" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ted.com&#x2F;talks&#x2F;thomas_thwaites_how_i_built_a_toas...</a>
评论 #26394028 未加载
评论 #26394043 未加载
another_commentabout 4 years ago
&gt;&gt; Modern smartphones however, seem like walled gardens in which I have no control at all.<p>By design, I think.<p>&gt;&gt; I am locked into a single OS on my smartphone, which either spies on you or is locked down even more. Every iteration a bit more control is taken away from the user.<p>I got so fed up with this, I abandoned the whole mobile infrastructure and built my own phone with a Raspberry Pi 3B+. The Raspberry Pi is pretty open hardware (yes, I&#x27;m aware it&#x27;s not perfect). For software I used Python 3, C and GTK. It does voice and SMS&#x2F;MMS only, but that is enough for me.<p>I built it for myself. It&#x27;s stable enough that I use it as my daily driver.<p>I am in the process of open sourcing the code and putting it out on github. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;another2020githubuser&#x2F;thepyphone" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;another2020githubuser&#x2F;thepyphone</a><p>I truly hope an open hardware smart phone becomes available soon. Until then, I&#x27;ll use my home grown PyPhone to get by.
olah_1about 4 years ago
For people asking why Urbit created new programming languages and architecture, this is big reason why.<p>Owning something should mean that you are able to fix it.<p>A single person can peak under the hood of the entire OS and know what&#x27;s going on (provided they learn the language). This is inconceivable even in something like Linux.<p>Simplicity is required for true ownership.
zelphirkaltabout 4 years ago
One way to get closer to this goal is to buy an liberated X200 or similar machine, which can run on only free software, install a free software OS like Trisquel and only ever install free software on it. Buying such a laptop from people in the free software community will also support them and their work. There are a few shops.<p>On the web you will still need to deal with how everything these days is behind the currently hip and trendy CDN, but you can choose not to use such websites. You can have a main machine and your freedom respecting machine. You choose your own compromise.<p>I did that some time ago and I have to say I love my freedom respecting mostly distraction free X200 for writing or coding. It is a great machine to work with, if you can accept old hardware and the implied worse performance.
评论 #26400300 未加载
40fourabout 4 years ago
It’s a somewhat angry &amp; rambling rant, but without picking it apart too hard, one sentence really resonated with me.<p>I would summarize the thesis in this sentence -&gt;<p><i>”I want a computer that does what I want it to do, not one that has a hidden agenda programmed into it at the factory.</i>”
TheOtherHobbesabout 4 years ago
You can&#x27;t have a &quot;computer that you own&quot; because a computer is no longer an independent device. It&#x27;s an access point - what used to be called a terminal - into a complex information ecosystem.<p>You won&#x27;t get what you want with different hardware and an open OS unless you also fix the ecosystem.<p>And that means fixing ad tech, cloud services, DNS, open packet inspection, location tracking, security at multiple levels, and any number of other technologies, only the last of which is the local OS.<p>Worrying about the item in your hand or on your desk is almost literally looking through the wrong end of the telescope.
guerrillaabout 4 years ago
This is epitome of what free software is. Get a system76 system. It&#x27;ll have a web browser and wine for when you feel like using non-free software.<p>p.s. aren&#x27;t Raptor Computing&#x27;s systems pretty much free too?
blhackabout 4 years ago
Get an old lenovo laptop and install openbsd on it. This post is legitimately a bit confusing to me since what they&#x27;re describing sounds like a pretty standard sort of BSD&#x2F;linux machine.
评论 #26394610 未加载
varencabout 4 years ago
It&#x27;s a bit ironic this site is served over unencrypted HTTP.<p>While static content on a blog doesn&#x27;t really need it, HTTPS would still help protect the privacy of visitors browsing history.
评论 #26395833 未加载
评论 #26394350 未加载
drvdevdabout 4 years ago
I don&#x27;t believe what the author is asking for exists. The answer to his question, in my opinion, is a definitive &quot;No.&quot; Even his 286 was arguably full of components which were probably backdoored in some manner. And even if your hardware and software stack is somehow fully private, having to work with the web as we all do, almost guarantees compromise.<p>This is not to say our efforts at privacy are completely in vain, just that this perfect endpoint doesn&#x27;t exist.
评论 #26396229 未加载
dasfabout 4 years ago
I got a bunch of FPGAs and I&#x27;m building my own 68k&#x2F;6502 machine to run my C programs and to tinker with assembly. Seems that I have a bunch of these chips so it will rapidly grow into a multiprocessor thing.<p>This is likely the only way forward other than RISC-V on FPGA. But they aren&#x27;t exactly well defined. Or open. Solid hardware RISC-V is interesting and medium term viable but I foresee a world of blobs waiting in the wings. Time will tell.
评论 #26397552 未加载
jhoechtlabout 4 years ago
Owning sthg. vs. renting has economical comsequences. If you own sthg. you will keep it for longer. If you rent you will keep it shorter. Plus all sorts of assurances can form as an ecosystem around that.<p>Therefore economy will push us to goods we don&#x27;t own. If you would like to own something you will have to pay the surplus for reduced turnover at the economies side.
p2t2pabout 4 years ago
I call bs on that article. A guy wants to do nothing and get the stuff for cheap. We&#x27;ll guess what, even if you get your thing for cheap once you get on the internet you&#x27;ll be open for all kind of malice and there&#x27;s ain&#x27;t anybody but you to deal with it.<p>Get a free hardware or hardware with crippled anti-features, they&#x27;re plenty of vendors that supply it, slap Linux on it, PGP encrypt your email and use secure chat. Oh, your want all of that to be done for you? Well you&#x27;ll have to pay then.<p>Or that another argument - that encryption is workaround. It&#x27;s like saying that food is not solution for being hungry but a workaround, a ridiculous statement. How are you supposed to stay private and anonymous if you communicate in the open? Are you going to have a private cable line to every correspondent you talk to?
评论 #26394566 未加载
Thorrezabout 4 years ago
&gt;I must rely on encryption algorithms that are designed with subtle flaws that can take years, if not decades, to come to light.<p>There&#x27;s Dual_EC_DRBG . Are there any other instances where this happened? And I thought barely anyone even used Dual_EC_DRBG because it was super slow. Did the author ever use it?
imissmymindabout 4 years ago
Get a pinephone and a pinebook pro and be done with it. When you want to get online, use a public WiFi like mcdonalds or starbucks and connect to tor or i2p and do your thing.<p>Attempting to hide in a world full of people who could care less about their privacy will make you stand out to those watching, however.
dhanvanthriabout 4 years ago
My daily driver is a thinkpad X200 that I librebooted myself.<p>I kid you not when I say that I derive immense pleasure from using it. Apart from a few (equally freedom respecting) devices I find, I literally never feel like I&#x27;m wanting for anything.<p>I can&#x27;t recommend it enough. I don&#x27;t have the words.
ubermonkeyabout 4 years ago
Under-acknowledged here is the relationship between the networks that make our devices useful and the increased homogenization of the devices themselves.<p>When I last truly owned my computer, connectivity (if it existed) was via dial-up.<p>The other thing I&#x27;d note is that we have more and better ways to communicate securely today than ever before. In the world I grew up in, we had phones, and Ma Bell knew who you called and how long you talked, and possibly even what you talked about. There was no real privacy or encryption possible; we all just pretended like those calls were private.<p>Private communication is possible now on Windows, Linux, Mac, iOS, Android, and I assume ChromeOS, right?
ncmncmabout 4 years ago
There are many, many more people who don&#x27;t want you to have that computer than there are yous. So you have to want it more at least as many times over as they don&#x27;t.<p>There certainly are other people who also want that computer. (E.g. me.) Maybe there are as many or more who do than don&#x27;t want any of you, or us, to have them.<p>We have the advantage that what we want is just like the computers everybody else has, except with things taken out.<p>The software is doable. The CPUs have &quot;management engines&quot; that, at least in some cases seem possible to disable. The wi-fi chips are a problem; we might need SDR to bypass those.<p>But the cell phone system is going to be a problem.
kjroseabout 4 years ago
I feel the same way but I quickly realize that as soon as all of those walled gardens and advertising networks are gone, a lot of the &quot;free&quot; or &quot;cheap&quot; tools and programs I like no longer are available. This is a combination of the fact that most people simply aren&#x27;t willing to pay for the stuff they use and would rather have ads and the fact that the remaining pool of people willing to pay is too small to split the cost to something reasonable.<p>Until we reach a point where we can break that cycle, getting a machine like he&#x27;s describing is going to either be really expensive or impossible.
评论 #26395422 未加载
natural219about 4 years ago
You should consider trying Urbit. There&#x27;s a large community of people who have had this desire for decades, and most of the good ones are settling there.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;urbit.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;urbit.org</a>
holstvoogdabout 4 years ago
While there are some nice open solutions out there, pine64 etc, one thing I&#x27;d like to see in more open projects is high quality.<p>I have a Pinebook Pro &amp; an System76 Darter laptop. I use neither because the build quality is weak. Things like a proper trackpad, decent resolutions etc. Basically, I want a Macbook Air, but open-ish. And I&#x27;d gladly pay the &#x27;premium&#x27; for it. Hell, that Darter was more expensive than a pretty decked out MBA &amp; it is a heap of cheap plastics.<p>If the hardware was there, I wouldn&#x27;t mind having to out some more effort in to getting a proper Linux distro running properly&#x2F;
bumbledravenabout 4 years ago
This separation of ownership and control is discussed at length in James Burnham&#x27;s <i>The Managerial Revolution</i> (1941). The central idea, if I&#x27;m not butchering it too badly, is that, as our technological society becomes increasingly complex, the owners of things no longer have control over them, and, therefore, the &quot;owners&quot; of those things no longer <i>actually</i> own them. The true owners, according to Burnham, are an emerging &quot;managerial class&quot; consisting of, e.g., bureaucrats, administrators, and technical managers.
Naracionabout 4 years ago
If you vibe with this article, you might be interested in the framework device ecosystem. They&#x27;re about to release a laptop, and a mobile device is also in the plans.<p>While this will not provide the kind of freedom on the software side that the thread seeks, at least you get the freedom to choose the hardware components that run your device.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;frame.work&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;frame.work&#x2F;</a><p>HN thread: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=26263508" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=26263508</a>
jay_kyburzabout 4 years ago
I want to live in Utopia too, but in the meantime I&#x27;m happy with Linux.
评论 #26394133 未加载
评论 #26394573 未加载
bogwogabout 4 years ago
&gt; Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can&#x27;t afford to buy<p>Which models is he talking about here? Those Raptor Power9 workstations that are like $7k are the only things that come to mind.
评论 #26394701 未加载
post_belowabout 4 years ago
&gt; Will this ever end?<p>It remains an interesting question. Is there any way to reclaim the autonomy and ethos of freedom from the earlier part of the digital era?<p>I&#x27;m not sure how that would look. I don&#x27;t mean in terms of a set of hardware and software solutions.<p>I mean technology that&#x27;s actually for the end users, available to everyone with curiosity as the only barrier to entry. It sounds like a utopian delusion even though it existed not so long ago.<p>I&#x27;m not sure there&#x27;s a realistic way to get there from here. I&#x27;d love to be wrong about that though.
评论 #26394456 未加载
jakearmitageabout 4 years ago
I don&#x27;t get it. For the &quot;affordable&quot; argument, you can buy a Raspberry Pi with Linux. Or any NUC with Linux. For everything else, system76, purism, think penguin, libiquity...
coding-saintsabout 4 years ago
I want to add that while the complexities of building a PC or understanding fundamentals of open source and licences is steep... For anyone who wants these constraints but is unwilling to be curious enough to learn the ways of DIY&#x2F;makers is gonna get smashed on this forum IMO. I would hope to see a sub-thread of OP asking for &quot;advice&quot; on how to achieve a solution solo (unless I missed it...) . I am a huge advocate for [devs] building their own PC&#x27;s for fundamental understandings..
alexashkaabout 4 years ago
&gt; Will I ever have a computer that I own?<p>Maybe yes, but why? <i>Why</i> do you want it?<p>As long as you remain a human being, there will <i>always</i> be things you&#x27;d prefer be otherwise if you just wait a while. If we take that as an axiom, we can stop trying to react to every discontent with thoughts of wanting the world to be different. Once you accept that things are the way they are and there ain&#x27;t a thing to do about most of &#x27;em, maybe that&#x27;s better than owning a computer you own. I dunno, works for me :)
TruthWillHurtabout 4 years ago
You want &quot;a computer&quot;... what is this mithical box? are you reffering to the hardware? the operating system? the internet?<p>Sounds like my mom - &quot;make the gizmo do things&quot;.<p>Install Linux, leave us be.
sanxiynabout 4 years ago
Please consider funding <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.powerpc-notebook.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.powerpc-notebook.org&#x2F;</a>. I did. (Seo Sanghyeon)
MikeTaylorabout 4 years ago
Richard Stallman&#x27;s got your back: see <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;gnu&#x2F;thegnuproject.en.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.gnu.org&#x2F;gnu&#x2F;thegnuproject.en.html</a> and skip down to the &quot;Challenges in our future&quot; heading.<p>I understand why people find Stallman irritating, but my word, he does tend to be right with terrifying frequency. (Come to think of it, that&#x27;s probably part of _why_ people find him irritating.)
waynesonfireabout 4 years ago
Isn&#x27;t this essentially what Richard Stallman talks about?
评论 #26400786 未加载
JulienBoyreauabout 4 years ago
What to own for, really ?<p>For wasting time reproducing the mistakes of the makers risking noise for signal ?<p>For fixing rules to be the king of a kingdom of one risking blood for throne ?<p>For protecting secrets to dangerous to share, having risking life ?<p>For the gut feeling sake of owning, missing common culture as a much more powerful nudge than Google &amp; Co ?<p>Or just properly for the need of justice ? Just in math, just in time, just for men !<p>Don’t want to own, but to get proper : one small step in mind, one giant leap in mind kind ;))
rini17about 4 years ago
Expensive? Depends on where you are looking. I am writing this from 10 year old 4-core AthlonII (pre-PSP) PC. These is surplus of these widely available for pennies. Will do everything I need except 4K video (might be solvable by GPU upgrade). I only regret I have not built Phenom system with ECC memory.<p>I am worried more about software. I&#x27;d like to have a compatible privacy-oriented browser with governance that puts quality and transparency first.
jpttsnabout 4 years ago
Computers have come a long way in a short time and are very complex. Maybe the diffuse ownership (that OP bemoans) is necessary for that complexity, or at least for it to develop so quickly.<p>If I want a typewriter, car or handgun I “truly own”, I might be able to build one, as a last resort. But building a satisfactory computer without the global supply chains (that impose the bemoaned limitations) seems impossible.
评论 #26399553 未加载
Vasloabout 4 years ago
This reminds me of my stress in finding a high end TV without a major company watching my TV habits. It doesn&#x27;t seem you can buy a high end TV without having Android or some other company watching what you are doing. Are there any high end TVs that have more open software? Or is profit such a high priority that we basically have to supplement tech companies through TVs?
jancsikaabout 4 years ago
&gt; Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can&#x27;t afford to buy<p>This is an implicit admission that the technology itself really doesn&#x27;t matter. If it did, the author would have scrounged and saved to get the expensive tool they need to start getting the results they desire, the same way musicians scrimp and save to get the instrument their ear tells them they need.
mogomanabout 4 years ago
Looking through some of the points above, I was somehow reminded of Johnny Mnemonic, where he puts together a computer to get online. Based on today&#x27;s reality he wouldn&#x27;t need all the most modern, hard core parts, but actually as retro as possible - break into a computer museum and fire up some kind of antique running code he writes himself.
vonwoodsonabout 4 years ago
Lost me at “that the NSA won’t intercept...” Sorry, it’s a spy agency, you can’t beat it because it’s sole purpose is to defeat whatever barriers you put up. Furthermore, “no metadata” that is the data required to be public in order to be routed through a publicly accessible network. And, it may be possible to anonymize that data, but... In light of the recent attempted overthrow of the government, I’m now firmly against giving away government monitoring of the internet. In fact, it’s time we give it some teeth.<p>We’ve been the victim of foreign propaganda to the point where the people have been driven mad by lies and the destruction of the American culture. We need defense in cyberspace the same way that we need defense against any invading forces. Few, sane, people argue against having a Navy or an Army; it’s just by the nature of the internet as a new technology that we’ve neglected it this long. And, before you give me the “those who would give up freedom for security...“ line: we already don’t have freedom, we already don’t have security. I often wish that people could recognize that the government of the people and by the people is for the people. And quit treating out greatest tool against tyranny as a whipping boy for whatever personal crap they are going through.
评论 #26398792 未加载
obviouslynotmeabout 4 years ago
<p><pre><code> Damocles was an obsequious courtier in the court of Dionysius II of Syracuse, a fourth century BC tyrant of Syracuse. Damocles exclaimed that, as a great man of power and authority, Dionysius was truly fortunate. Dionysius offered to switch places with him for a day, so he could taste that fortune first-hand. In the evening a banquet was held, where Damocles very much enjoyed being waited upon like a king. Only at the end of the meal did he look up and notice a sharpened sword hanging directly above his head, held only by a single horse-hair. Immediately, he lost all taste for the festivities and asked leave of the tyrant, saying he no longer wanted to be so fortunate. Dionysius had successfully conveyed a sense of the constant threat under which a powerful man lives. </code></pre> - The Sword of Damocles, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wiktionary.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;sword_of_Damocles" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wiktionary.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;sword_of_Damocles</a><p>The powerful are perpetually terrified. They are scared of each other. They are scared of the populace. If someone created a perfectly secure computer or phone with secure messaging capabilities, from the hardware up, that company would immediately be told to play ball or face blackballing.
m1117about 4 years ago
In a way you can achieve that. Microsoft and google, they don&#x27;t know who exactly you are, they just treat you as a behavior pattern, not a human. So they don&#x27;t know you personally. You&#x27;re good. If you talk to anyone, the other person will know what you texted them and who you are, so it&#x27;s not anonymous already.
mrverifyabout 4 years ago
A collection of ice40 FPGAs built into a computer? surface mount transistor implementation of a pdp8 with regular semiconductor memory and an FPGA MMU that handles gigabyte memory sticks? I was thinking a forth computer, but the applications are sparse: gForth spreadsheet and word processor, both text based.
h0ndabout 4 years ago
Since phones are nothing else than computers nowadays: I want a phone that I own!<p>The mobile phones are by far more limiting and take away control of the owner.<p>A simple example would be the possibility to edit the HOSTS file on Android. I am the owner and administrator of this device, yet I am unable to do basic controls of my device.
评论 #26397313 未加载
solmanacabout 4 years ago
My approach to getting a computer I own has been influenced by the esolangs website and I am implementing a single instruction set computer using random ttl chips. I don&#x27;t care that it won&#x27;t run preexisting software. Networking will be implemented using hand-couriered one time pads.
fogettiabout 4 years ago
I find it ironic that the author points out in the first part of the post that companies are the real culprit but later puts the blame on governments. I wouldn&#x27;t do such differentiation. They are equally wrong. Regarding free speech too. Case in point are the recent de-platformings.
评论 #26409307 未加载
Wolfenstein98kabout 4 years ago
&quot;Perhaps I am looking for something like the x286 DOS computer I had in the early 1990&#x27;s [...] Instead, I have a computer that is designed largely to maximize the profits of the computer industry.&quot;<p>Who&#x27;s going to tell him who made the x286 and DOS? Not exactly 501(C) organisations...
评论 #26395040 未加载
aidenn0about 4 years ago
I&#x27;m going to push back a bit when the author is both comparing what they want to an 80s 286 PC <i>and</i> complaining that the only models today that meet their needs are too expensive.<p>The inflation-adjusted price of an IBM AT when it was introduced in 1984 was about $15k.
unobatbayarabout 4 years ago
It&#x27;s probably very difficult to be 100% sure, even if we create the hardware and software on our own. Therefore, be mindful of your actions and always assume it&#x27;s being monitored. Running linux on raspberry pi might be a good start though.
arpaabout 4 years ago
You still own the computer. But, but, the root of the problem is actually the web. The browser is essentially a operating system nowadays, there are very few browser engines and even less browser engines without links to corporate overlords.
kebmanabout 4 years ago
I&#x27;m already some ways along with program that allows secure communication over TCP&#x2F;IP between clients. I&#x27;m sure there are many like it, but this one is mine. :) Not sure how you&#x27;d cooperate on such a project though.
greendude29about 4 years ago
Is this a joke?<p>Of course Apple and Microsoft won&#x27;t get you any privacy (see Prism), but Linux and a good VPN can get the author everything they want.<p>This isn&#x27;t a high bar for computers. I&#x27;m not sure what part I&#x27;m missing.
chjabout 4 years ago
The author didn&#x27;t define what owning means, but my guess is that, the computer must not run code without his approval, and must be able to run any code he wants.<p>Nowadays, you can only truly own an emulator.
评论 #26394428 未加载
mikewarotabout 4 years ago
You <i>can</i> own a computer, but you have to go back to the days of MS-DOS and floppy disks to really be sure. Once a program is running on MS-DOS, it essentially owns the machine until it makes a DOS or BIOS call. There isn&#x27;t really enough room in the system to fit any advanced back doors, and you can have your operating system on a hardware write protected disk. You can make backups that you can verify, and write protect those, and keep them offline.<p>-- The key advantage of an old MS-DOS &#x2F; floppy based computer is that you can <i>always bring your system back to a known safe state</i>--<p>Once you adopt any operating system that is always running, <i>the OS</i> has to protect the hardware from everything, if you want to be able to trust it. <i>This rules out Linux, Mac-OS, Windows, etc.</i> I&#x27;m hoping that Genode does a good enough job to be able to trust it, but it&#x27;s a bit beyond my learning curve right now.<p>If you have a secure OS, which isn&#x27;t stupid about trust, then you&#x27;re back in the saddle again, and can build upon this foundation, being careful to never give any executable you run more privilege than it needs to do the job. Linux, Windows, and Mac-OS all have stupid defaults (allow everything the user is permitted)... Genode and systems that implement capabilities don&#x27;t do that. (No, &quot;access your contacts&quot; on your tablet or phone is not a proper &quot;capability&quot;, &quot;you can read this file&quot;, and &quot;you can write this folder&quot; are <i>proper</i> capabilities).<p>-- A secure system lets you assign capabilities using dialog boxes like you&#x27;re used to using, except they call them a &quot;power box&quot;. The OS then enforces your decisions, not the application. No matter how rogue or confused your program gets, it can&#x27;t access anything outside of the files or folders you&#x27;ve given it access to. 8)<p>We&#x27;re a few years out before awareness of the stupid defaults we&#x27;re all living with take hold, and the inertia of everything then has to be overcome. We&#x27;ll get there eventually, if we can keep the idea at least an open option before big business closes it down for good.
评论 #26400248 未加载
vladmkabout 4 years ago
You will get there you just need to wait. The latest computers are driven to improve because of the profit it seems you hate in your post, but Moore’s law is on your side.
pifabout 4 years ago
&gt; I want a computer that I own<p>No, you don&#x27;t. Or, at least, you didn&#x27;t want it enough for too long enough!<p>Each time you sent your friend a document which was not formatted in an open standard, you didn&#x27;t want a computer that you owned.<p>Each time you accepted DRM in order to access some nice content, you didn&#x27;t want a computer that you owned.<p>Each time you run a program or, God forbids, an OS which you didn&#x27;t have the source code of, you didn&#x27;t want a computer that you owned.<p>Each time you accepted to be target by advertisers as a way to enjoy a &quot;free&quot; service, you didn&#x27;t want a computer that you owned.<p>Industry gave you what you wanted. Industry gives you what you still want.
评论 #26398395 未加载
hykoabout 4 years ago
<i>Except for a handful of very over-priced models that I can&#x27;t afford to buy</i><p>What models are being referred to here? Sounds like the OP’s problem can be solved with more money.
评论 #26398952 未加载
peanut_wormabout 4 years ago
This article made me look into Intel ME and AMD PSP. Kind of concerning to have a black box in my PC that could be doing pretty much anything.
mbravorusabout 4 years ago
Surprised nobody mentioned The Helm ( <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thehelm.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thehelm.com&#x2F;</a> )
squid_demonabout 4 years ago
Really looking forward to the C256 Foenix U<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;c256foenix.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;c256foenix.com&#x2F;</a>
annoyingnoobabout 4 years ago
To some extent, &#x27;maximizing the profits of the computer industry&#x27; has given us the slick hardware that we have available.
Animatsabout 4 years ago
For the total opposite, see today&#x27;s article on &quot;remote workstations&quot;, where your computer is just a dumb terminal.
ohiovrabout 4 years ago
This is one of the reasons I built LibreStudio.
fctorialabout 4 years ago
&gt; Except for a handful of very over-priced models<p>Which ones?
_pmf_about 4 years ago
&quot;You will own nothing, and you will be happy&quot; is only getting started.
AnonsLadderabout 4 years ago
Purism&#x2F;Librem sell coreboot&#x27;d devices. It&#x27;s worth checking out
guidoismabout 4 years ago
A microcontroller is probably the closest you can get these days and honestly a modern MCU is going to be powerful enough of for most use cases.<p>There’s a huge world of difference in complexity and understandability between an MCU and the SOCs in a phone even if the instruction set is the same.
geff82about 4 years ago
Wouldn&#x27;t a Thinkpad with Linux or BSD be what the writer wants?
frobisherabout 4 years ago
I&#x27;m curious, why is there no widespread Ubuntu for mobile?
bsimaabout 4 years ago
give this guy an urbit
addictedabout 4 years ago
Isn’t Linux sufficient to achieve what the OP is asking?
xchipabout 4 years ago
yeah, I hate Windows 10 making all those https requests on the background sending who knows what to who knows where.
Koshkinabout 4 years ago
What <i>do</i> we own though? (Heck, we don’t even own our bodies - they are “owned” by the nature, which can often be pretty “evil.”)
aranibattaabout 4 years ago
yup, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sail.so" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;sail.so</a>
kshitijgoelabout 4 years ago
Well, you have your brain.
pengaruabout 4 years ago
What the hell is an x286
larrikabout 4 years ago
This seems like a lot of words for &quot;I wish I was brave enough to try Linux&quot;
t0r0nat0rabout 4 years ago
Get a VM and s VPN.
literallyWTFabout 4 years ago
This is probably one of the honest to god, lamest things I’ve read.
mrRAabout 4 years ago
Use Urbit
alexisreadabout 4 years ago
So if we want to go with completely open arch, we&#x27;d be looking at something like this: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hackster.io&#x2F;news&#x2F;a-feather-compatible-fpga-board-running-a-risc-v-core-with-lorawan-848d6257aa88" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.hackster.io&#x2F;news&#x2F;a-feather-compatible-fpga-board...</a><p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;mcci-catena&#x2F;HW-Designs&#x2F;tree&#x2F;master&#x2F;Boards&#x2F;Catena-4710" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;mcci-catena&#x2F;HW-Designs&#x2F;tree&#x2F;master&#x2F;Boards...</a> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;mcci-catena&#x2F;catena-riscv32-fpga" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;mcci-catena&#x2F;catena-riscv32-fpga</a><p>ie. an FPGA you can put your own OS AND radio firmware on. Something like <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bunniestudios.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;?p=5921" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bunniestudios.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;?p=5921</a> (and see the updates <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.crowdsupply.com&#x2F;sutajio-kosagi&#x2F;precursor&#x2F;updates" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.crowdsupply.com&#x2F;sutajio-kosagi&#x2F;precursor&#x2F;updates</a>) doesn&#x27;t cut it fully as the wifi has a firmware blob, and in addition I&#x27;m not sure how open the xilinx toolchain is (might be, I know some xilinx chips are supported by open source toolchains).<p>As an OS for the feather board, you could use DASH7 for the radio portion (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;DASH7" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;DASH7</a>), and Oberon as a general OS. (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.gadgetfactory.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;02&#x2F;how-to-implement-the-old-oberon-system-on-a-modern-fpga&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.gadgetfactory.net&#x2F;2016&#x2F;02&#x2F;how-to-implement-the-...</a>)<p>Obviously several problems exist there - only Linux has an available FPGA toolchain, so you need a linux computer to bootstrap Oberon onto the FPGA, and DASH7 won&#x27;t run on the same device (it runs on STM32 boards mainly).<p>So, to get a completely open design, you&#x27;d need to port DASH7 stack and the FPGA tools to Oberon to allow self-hosting and fully open radio. Add to that the fact that this board doesn&#x27;t supply any video output so your development is over ssh&#x2F;terminal and you have a way to go to get a fully open system.<p>Other pain points are that Oberon is a systems language that uses GC, so for deterministic&#x2F;realtime (radio) operation it is not usable - you&#x27;d need to use it&#x27;s cousin Composita to have a deterministic memory managed OS.<p>Lastly, Oberon doesn&#x27;t have any formal verification tools which would be ideal for verifying the entire self-hosted stack. I suspect you&#x27;d need to use a LISP of some sort to be able to verify things from the ground up. Of course most LISPs have GC so you&#x27;d need to migrate the Composita+Oberon (A2) architecture to LISP to be able to build higher-level verifiable constructs.<p>However... this is almost possible. There are a few key things to work out here, but it&#x27;s closer than at any point previously :)
chipotle_coyoteabout 4 years ago
What does it mean to &quot;own a computer&quot;?<p>Do I own my M1 MacBook Air? Did I own my TRS-80 Model 4, an 8-bit, Z80-based computer circa 1983? Well, I didn&#x27;t <i>lease</i> either one of them, I bought them outright. Apple can&#x27;t demand their hardware back now any more than Radio Shack could have demanded theirs back then. So that&#x27;s owning, right? No?<p>You say I don&#x27;t own my Mac because I can&#x27;t put a different operating system on it. It&#x27;s true, I could run multiple operating systems on the TRS-80. Sort of. There was TRSDOS, CP&#x2F;M, and... several nearly-interchangeable TRSDOS clones. Of course, I can run a lot <i>more</i> on the M1 if you count virtual machines (including all the TRS-80 operating systems), but I know that&#x27;s not what you mean. You can run any OS that&#x27;s been ported to the Mac on the Mac, though, and there&#x27;s already work being done to port Linux and NetBSD. Do I not own the Mac because Apple&#x27;s security measures make it difficult to do that porting?<p>You say I&#x27;m dependent on the largesse of Apple and they can &quot;take things away&quot; from me as long as I&#x27;m using the Mac. And, it&#x27;s true they have a potential level of control over what I can run on macOS that Radio Shack didn&#x27;t have over TRSDOS. Yet for practical purposes I depended on the largess of Radio Shack, too, and when that stopped, the writing was on the wall for that compuer line. Not the same thing? No, not exactly, but I bet you can&#x27;t name a Mac application that you can&#x27;t run because Apple pulled a hidden switch that stopped it from running. You can name a few that you could run a decade ago -- or in a very few cases, a year ago -- that you can&#x27;t now because the OS changed, or the hardware changed. I can&#x27;t run my once-beloved crazy writing brainstorming app, Dramatica Story Expert. But that&#x27;s because its developer is legendarily terrible at keeping up with modern Apple hardware. It isn&#x27;t because I don&#x27;t own my computer.<p>You say that things aren&#x27;t &quot;private&quot; on the Mac. What&#x27;s that mean? The <i>local</i> data on the Mac is more protected than the local data on the TRS-80 was, I can tell you. Forget encryption, stuff rarely had plain text passwords! Data that isn&#x27;t local is a question mark now, but it was a question mark then, too -- to the degree it was possible to have non-local data on places like BBSes and Compuserve and even the early Internet. I have way more data &quot;in the cloud&quot; now, but in many ways it&#x27;s a lot more secure, because we weren&#x27;t just <i>thinking</i> about security in the same way three or four decades ago. As for ad tracking, I&#x27;d argue that&#x27;s a really important conversation about privacy, but it&#x27;s not a conversation about &quot;owning my computer&quot; unless we&#x27;re <i>really</i> stretching the metaphor.<p>And in the final analysis, &quot;you don&#x27;t own your own computer&quot; is a metaphor, a semantic sleight of hand. I&#x27;m surely playing a semantic game here myself, but my issue with a lot of these arguments is that they&#x27;re presenting as something that they maybe aren&#x27;t. They&#x27;re maybe less about <i>liberté, égalité, fraternité</i> than they are about nostalgia for a (remembered as) simpler, more tinkering-friendly time.<p>Perhaps we&#x27;re going to return to a time where it&#x27;s difficult to put an OS on your computer other than the one sanctioned by its manufacturer. Is that great? No. Does it mean we don&#x27;t really own our computers? I&#x27;m just not sure I buy that.<p>[To vainly try to head off the &quot;but iOS&quot; responses: I&#x27;m explicitly talking about Macs in this example. And no, I don&#x27;t expect Macs to ever be locked down to the degree iOS is. That&#x27;s a rant for another time, though.]
markus_zhangabout 4 years ago
The problem is: Do we own ourselves?
milliamsabout 4 years ago
I realise that ISO 8601 is behind a paywall but using<p>&gt; 2-26-21<p>as a date format is just wrong.
hrishiabout 4 years ago
Agree with most of the comments, but it&#x27;s worth mentioning that you will never get those things for cheap.<p>The reason most of the things you buy are cheap is due to economies of scale - you want something a lot of people want.<p>Want a bicycle with 2 wheels? Cheap. Want one with 7 wheels? Expensive.<p>Unfortunately for you, almost none of the things you say you want in a laptop are things you&#x27;re aligned with most of humanity in terms of priority. Sure, most people might tell you they want those things, but they&#x27;re not willing to give up the benefits of centralization, or pay a few bucks to get rid of ads.<p>Tldr: if you want something few people will buy, expect to pay more.
Klwohuabout 4 years ago
I suspect that the secret laws passed after 911, which Ron Paul among others have alluded to, make this a pipe dream.
评论 #26393950 未加载
评论 #26393977 未加载
chiasabout 4 years ago
&gt; I want a computer that can be completely autonomous when I want it to be, but which can also be used to communicate securely with anyone on the planet without being observed by a third party.<p>I think this is the rub of the problem, because it&#x27;s a contradiction: &quot;I want secure software with no vulnerabilities, but don&#x27;t you dare force me to update&quot;. This kinda sorta worked in the early 90&#x27;s because most people weren&#x27;t on the internet and few were actively thinking of exploiting anything -- it was a time of plaintext protocols and unauthenticated commands. The world has moved on, and our tradeoffs balance in a different place today.