Hacker News Reader

Comment by TheBrokenRail | Hacker News Reader

I really hate the modern idea of locking down devices to protect users from themselves. It's my device and I should be allowed to install what I want on it.

Android's better than iOS in that regard, but that doesn't mean it isn't still terrible. Sure, you can sideload apps, but you still can't run as root unless your device's manufacturer allows it. And sure, it might have a built-in file manager, but in newer versions of Android, you can't read/write to /sdcard/Android/data without a separate device.

And this trend is even infecting non-phone devices as well. You can't install extensions on Firefox if they haven't been signed by Mozilla. The only way to disable this restriction is to use a fork or beta version (Developer Edition or Nightly).

View on HN

Most people are using computing devices to do the specific things the device is designed for, quite often in a low-trust high-security work environment (even when this isn't explicitly how people think of it, it's usually the case - i.e. bad things happen when unauthorized access takes place). For the vast majority of people creating barriers or guard-rails around what their device can do is actually a win. People and organisations often put a lot of effort and expense into creating even further guardrails and restrictions a lot of the time.

There are hobbyists and professionals who take apart, repair and/or modify cars but it's also generally a very good thing that you can't just make (or easily authorise someone else or their product to make) significant modifications to how your car works. The walled gardens are really just computing growing up.

The protection is practically an illusion as well. Take a gander at the latest Pixel or iOS security update:

https://source.android.com/docs/security/bulletin/pixel/2023...

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT213757

Yikes!

> protect users from themselves

I think that purpose you're ascribing isn't entirely right. It's many things, but not just that.

Have you ever helped a relative who installed a dozen IE toolbars and so much malware that his computer became unusable?

This is what happens when you give a user the ability to install whatever he wants. This is what still happens for a lot of android phones.

I'm pretty sure this doesn't actually happen on Android phones, and it doesn't even happen anymore in Windows, which runs with admin privileges by default. The toolbars and viruses were mostly a thing pre Windows XP SP2, and they were mostly gone with Windows Vista.

It does happen, but in a different form. Now we have programms that prompt us during installation to install another software (antivirus or browser [looking at you Ccleaner]) for no good reason and most users (including my friends and family) simply click next without reading anything. Same thing on Android but with sticker/gif apps. I can't keep track of the times I had to help a relative or friend with stupid fullscreen pop-ups or adds on their phone and with unwanted software on Windows.

I see it a good bit with less technical users on Android. They'll get apps which put full screen ads on their phone popping up all the time, they'll get ads on their lock screen, they'll get their default browser swapped out and not understand what happened, all kinds of things.

> This is what happens when you give a user the ability to install whatever he wants. This is what still happens for a lot of android phones.

"Some people are bad drivers so all humans must be banned from driving"

What is the psychological cause of such subservience to a corporate entity?

Nobody should be banned from anything. I'm literally member of a libertarian party (not the crazy american one).

What I'm arguing for is people who voluntarily buy devices which are locked down for themselves and their loved ones because we'd rather put sensible restrictions in place for ourselves.

It’s not voluntary when it’s your only choice, or when you get it second hand from someone else. You should always have the option to unlock your own device

Ah yes, the “lowest common denominator” argument. Personally, I hate the idea that everyone should be punished because some people can’t handle something.

They are majority. Why punish them because a few people can't handle not having full access to the device? I like open ecosystems but I don't think your argument holds. Nobody can be an expert in everything.

If only people thought this way about guns, where the overwhelming majority causes no problems yet <1% are insane so some people try to ban them for everybody.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com