this post was submitted on 29 Mar 2024
198 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37699 readers
291 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Edit: Guys I didn't write the headline; the subtitle that I added, I've now fixed tho

Edit: Also, the information about there being no escape is out of date -- here's a quick guide to how to fix the problem in the modern day

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ptz@dubvee.org 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Which part exactly are you disagreeing with? Do you think that we should force people to never be allowed to run an OS that enforces a strict update regimen? Because I think you probably actually think that the user should be allowed to choose how they update; whether that be mandatory and automatic, or manual and optional. The reality is, the vast majority of people will opt for the former, and I think we both agree that they should be allowed that choice.

The real issue is transparency: what is being installed and executed, why, and is any data being collected. As long as all that can be audited at will, I don't see any issue with the existence of an OS that insists on being updated for the people who want that.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I don't see any issue with the existence of an OS that insists on being updated for the people who want that.

Emphases mine, obviously. No OS (nor its vendor) should insist how I use it or force anything on me, the owner / administrator. If it wants to make an opt-in option to make certain things automatic for the lazy / technically-challenged, sure, whatever, but don't make it mandatory or convoluted to opt out (if opt-in is a dealbreaker)

I don't want my OS to treat me like an idiot, a child, a product to be data mined, a mark to sell stuff to, etc. Just handle I/O, render what I tell it, do what I tell it, and don't take liberties or suggest things to me.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, I don't think you're disagreeing with my point. I get it, you aren't the person who wants to be treated like an idiot when it comes to your computer, but the vast majority of computer users do.

There are many things in your life that you rely on on a daily basis that you never think about the internals of. Maybe your electrical system, your washer and dryer, your car, the roof over your head, the mail system, or the kitchen at a restaurant. All of these things are black boxes that get you what you want without you having to ever think about how it works. Because you don't want manual control over every single thing in your life you interact with, no one has time for that, you couldn't function in modern society.

Your computer is an exception that you have arbitrarily chosen to have intimate control over, but most other people don't. In their perfect world, they don't even know they're using a computer, it's just a magical box that gets them what they want.

[–] ptz@dubvee.org 1 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Respectfully, I am disagreeing with your point.

To be quite blunt about it, I'm tired of everything constantly being dumbed down to accommodate the lowest common denominator, intellectually non-curious "everyman". Every once in a while, people should be expected to reach up, just a little. Otherwise, it's a race to the bottom.

Just because I'm expecting people to reach up doesn't mean no one will be there to help.

[–] teawrecks@sopuli.xyz 2 points 7 months ago

Ok, so it sounds like you are in fact arguing that people shouldn't be allowed to run a system that forces updates. And yeah, I think we will have to agree to disagree. I believe people should be free to run whatever they want on their own devices, regardless of my personal beliefs.

Remember, we're not talking about a system that spies on you without telling you, or recommends things to you without you wanting it to, we're specifically talking about a system that says "either let me update myself, or I will stop functioning". And I think that's perfectly reasonable system for a person to want and have.

Most people have absolutely no need to understand how the systems they use operate under the hood.

If anyone does care to "reach up", it's not hard to find the steps to disable it on Google. But 99.9% of people aren't going to do that.