Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tycho | Hacker News Reader

I just don't see the relationship between government overstepping the mark... and buying a proprietary product form a company you respect, because you want to use the product and are willing to sacrifice the desirable but non-essential quality of unfettered access to its innards.

...OK, actually I do see the connection. The suggestion is probably that if the technology is not totally open, you don't know how much power you're giving away (the manufacturers could be cooperating secretly with the authorities). But if you really feel like this, all you need to do is refrain from using your iClosedDevice for any type of work or communication that you wouldn't trust in the hands of the manufacturers/authorities.

... And OK, I see the point that we need to support the alternative methods or else their won't be any when we need them. It's just the either/or sentiment that bugs me.

View on HN

How about printers that secretly record tracking info on each page you print? Or the code in PhotoShop that makes sure I can't scan money? We know about these now, but only because they were discovered. I'm not sure if it is even possible to buy a printer with out this "technology".

These are only examples: how about when we find that the government has not only been tracking us via our cellphones, but also activating the mic and activly collecting data? It just is not possible to "choose" not to be spied on, unless you know all the ways the spying is done.

I fail to see how that Stalman quote applies there. I may be missing something, but how the question what openness or closedness of software has really (I mean really not some hypthetical "possibly maybe somewhere in the future") to do with SOPA. I thought Internet runs pretty much on open source… Or is this now fashionable to bring Stallman into anything even remotely related, because he is like bible "open to interpretation"?

> the manufacturers could be cooperating secretly with the authorities

They might not be doing it now, but there's no telling if they won't start doing it later, when the government will ask for data or surveillance because of terrorist threat or <insert the hottest fear-words at that moment>.

... And OK, then you saw the point of the article, after all.

EDIT: Lesson to self. Don't post while you have a cold, and pounding headache as a result. It'll get you downvoted.

But the point of the article seems slightly different from Stallman's stance. The article said 'support Linux, even if you use Windows' - whereas IIRC the FSF says 'never use Windows' or something to that affect.

Rather it's only use proprietary software if by doing so you are able to make it more free.

That is true, and I agree with it. If that's what you meant, I apologize. My post came more out of annoyance that you kept adding more info with the "And OK"-label, which partially changed your initial stance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com