Comment by quitit | Hacker News Reader

Comment by quitit | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I wanted a sedan, not a 4WD - if I wanted a 4WD I would have bought that instead.

I’m pretty tired of people telling me what is “good” for me. When they don’t know my situation or how I use my tools.

The product you’re advocating for exists - I didn’t buy it on purpose. I know it exists, I looked into it and it wasn’t for me. I don’t want the product I chose to turn into that other product - that would be a bad thing. That would be anti-consumer and anti-choice - I don’t regret the choices I made and I’m regularly reminded that they were the correct choice to make.

I’m educated and mature enough to know what is good for me, I don’t need a random telling me what is good for me. Stop pretending to know what is good for me - you don’t know what is good for me and using jail metaphors doesn’t make you sound convincing - it makes you sound biased with a predetermined outcome. Don’t try to “market” to me using such words, they are transparent.

Contrary to your hand waving of the concerns of others - there remains legitimate issues with that approach, and arguably it’s good that both options exist in the market.

> I wanted a sedan, not a 4WD - if I wanted a 4WD I would have bought that instead.

I have said this a dozen times and I will keep saying it: being able to exercise the same level of control (on a device you own) as the company that manufactured it and sold it is a matter of consumer rights, not choice. In the same way that the law requires car makers to adhere to certain standards and make parts available, the same thing should happen with electronics that have any sort of chip capable of running any code. It should be straight up outlawed that a company can have more control over a device than its end user, even after the end user has bought it.

So to be clear, your argument is that I have the right to full control of my devices, and that right entails that I _don't_ have the right to buy a locked down iOS device?

I understand that I don't have the right to take an unsafe vehicle on the road. That's logical, as it impacts others. But saying that I have a right I must exercise in a certain way (i.e. must have full ownership of devices), even when it affects no-one else, isn't a right, it's a duty.

Don't install an alternative store. Simple.

> I’m educated and mature enough to know what is good for me

Surely then you wouldn’t install anything you didn’t want to, if non-App Store installation was possible?

To use your metaphor, we’re talking about the sedan also having a switch that turns it into a 4WD, only as needed and for those who want it.

I respect that time brings change, at first I would likely never need to use it and could easily keep it off.

However that’s not how things work - and eventually I will be forced to use it to achieve the tasks I achieve today without it.

Advocate for yourself, but don’t pretend to advocate on my behalf when you’re actually just advocating for yourself.

Then when everyone is advocating for themselves - that will reveal who is the actual minority.

> Surely then you wouldn’t install anything you didn’t want to, if non-App Store installation was possible?

My job might require me to install apps from Honest Achmed's App Store, Certificate Authority, and Used Cars (https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=647959).

I would have bought an Android if I wanted a free-for-all platform with limited security updates, multiple app stores, and other debris; I chose an iPhone so I wouldn't have to deal with these issues.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com