nemorathwald (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
nemorathwald) wrote2005-11-17 01:12 pm
nemorathwald) wrote2005-11-17 01:12 pm
Entry tags:
Open Source Philosophy
Bruce Schneier has an article in WIRED Magazine which is a must-read for all computer users who care about keeping their computers free from spyware, malicious access cloaking programs, and other malware. He describes how anti-virus companies chose not to block Sony's malicious computer intrusion program on their infected music CDs. They considered it a "legitimate application" just because it was a criminal act by a corporation instead of by a criminal organization. How far will this collusion go? Can only open-source software save us from the collusion of these moneyed interests?
In fact, the next Microsoft Windows, "Vista," will have digital rights management technology built in that will make Microsoft the true owner of your computer. When you enter a command, the computer will go and ask its true masters for permission to obey you. You'll no longer really own content on your computer, you'll just be leasing it from the content providers. You know where this is going. They will control where, when, how many times, and in what form you use content, keep charging you for it again and again, and delete it from your own hard drive whenever they want. Microsoft and the music and movie industries will be in each other's back pockets to reduce the value of their products to you while simultaneously demanding more money from you for all the things you've been getting for free for decades.
Can I ask the open-source folks something? A lot of us out here in end-user-land want the computer to hold our hands and do most stuff invisibly for us while we manage our digital photos, music, games and other spokes on the digital hub. A computer is the hub of our non-computer lives. For us, it's a means, not an end. If we don't find it fun to write shell scripts, compile source code, and other hacking tasks on our own computer, does this mean we want software companies to own our computers and decide what we do with the spokes of our digital hub? If you have a servant, don't you want that servant to be autonomous to a certain degree? How much middle ground is there where they don't get to stomp on our right to our own computer, but we don't have to pay dearly in a difficultly level that makes the computing experience too costly for us? Is it fair to want that?
In fact, the next Microsoft Windows, "Vista," will have digital rights management technology built in that will make Microsoft the true owner of your computer. When you enter a command, the computer will go and ask its true masters for permission to obey you. You'll no longer really own content on your computer, you'll just be leasing it from the content providers. You know where this is going. They will control where, when, how many times, and in what form you use content, keep charging you for it again and again, and delete it from your own hard drive whenever they want. Microsoft and the music and movie industries will be in each other's back pockets to reduce the value of their products to you while simultaneously demanding more money from you for all the things you've been getting for free for decades.
Can I ask the open-source folks something? A lot of us out here in end-user-land want the computer to hold our hands and do most stuff invisibly for us while we manage our digital photos, music, games and other spokes on the digital hub. A computer is the hub of our non-computer lives. For us, it's a means, not an end. If we don't find it fun to write shell scripts, compile source code, and other hacking tasks on our own computer, does this mean we want software companies to own our computers and decide what we do with the spokes of our digital hub? If you have a servant, don't you want that servant to be autonomous to a certain degree? How much middle ground is there where they don't get to stomp on our right to our own computer, but we don't have to pay dearly in a difficultly level that makes the computing experience too costly for us? Is it fair to want that?
no subject
The closed source world is the opposite. You pay, sometimes through the nose, for software, and you have every right to expect that software to perform well, and serve your needs. If it doesn't ask for your money back, and never buy software from there again. You probably won't get your money back (you opened the package! You are now subject to our almighty EULA, and you will never get your money back because we think you are pirate scum trying to steal our software!) but you can at least stop giving them money. Microsoft never gets any of my money anymore. Neither does Sony. I vote with my wallet, in true capitalistic fashion.
Now if modern Linux is too dificult for you... I'm befuddled. There's not much out there that isn't easy to use. Web browsing, IM, e-mail, feed aggregation, music, movies, games, office suite.... Linux is all grown up, and ready to go. Some distros are more user-friendly than others, but if you find the right one for you, Linux generally gives me *fewer* headaches than Windows does. And it doesn't try to control me or my computer. It lets me call the shots.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2005-11-18 01:02 am (UTC)(link)no subject
no subject
Unfortunately there is a great devide right now.
Open source produces quality code, and amazing applications .. . . . But does not seem to produce very good "User Experience" yet. . . . .Which is one of the key concerns from the Corporate Software World.
On the flip side the Corporate Software World is much mroe likely to produce software that perverts and subverts your computer.
The answer I use myself? I run a Windows 2000 Pro box. I refuse to update to XP until I *Know* I can divorce it from the Microsoft Hive. I accept that, in the next 3 years I will have an unsupported OS.
I rebuild my box at least once a year. I assume that Soemthing has gotten in at that point that I don't want, and so I use this as a sort of Prophalaxys . . . And it allowes me to see something like the Sony rootkit as an annoyance, rather than a killer. I find out I have it, I bump up my yearly refresh schedule.
Finally, I am carefull. I have a CD player to play music. I use it. I have a DVD player to watch movies. I use that too. I have "Autoplay" turned off on my CD drives. . . So that if I want to rip a MP3, I don't ens up running sony's rootkit, or whatever. I NEVER check out the "Free" features included on something I bought .. . Unless I KNOW I want it. . . . And it checks out on the internet.
In other words, Im proactive about having a clean PC, and have no attachment to the current incarnation of my box. It's just a box. As long as I save my movies, or MP3's, or documents, or savegames. . . . . Who cares? Sure, it's a couple hours. . . But you get a clean, new Operating system, no annoying glitches. . . . It's a clean start.
Meanwhile, I *Hope* the open source community takes on the issue of interface design, and "User Experience" with the same Gusto that they took on Operating systems. . . . . .And I bet they will. Probably even this decade . .. . . . . .
no subject
In this world, you do.
Regardless of the OS, you should know how to work your computer to the best of your abilities. If you cannot do it yourself, you are automatically putting yourself in the hands of others. This applies to cars, home repair and computers.
The middle ground is struck between personal knowledge and the knowledge and leverage thereof of others.
A computer is a tool, not a servant.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2005-11-18 01:05 am (UTC)(link)no subject
no subject
I see them as an extension to our own consciousnesses at the moment. From there, we will build theirs from ours, and if you'll pardon the expression, to an extent, build them in our image as best we can, as that's what we can relate to.
They are capable of automating tasks. But they cannot act of their own volition to the point of being independent from us. They are not capable of doing our jobs. What they are capable of doing is repetitive, predictible tasks that a human previously did. There is a difference.
But without us, at the moment, they would falter and eventually fail.
As someone who has their hands in the guts of large systems on a daily basis, I'd agree that we're at the nematode stage of technological revolution. Large networks tend to act like simple organisms in how reflexive reactions take place. But no further than that. There's a brainstem there, possibly, but no higher thinking. There is NO free will in there yet, as much as I like to joke about the machines I maintain doing things just to spite me.
I find it interesting that you perceive computing and related technologies in anthropomorphological terms. I wonder as to the deeper reasons.
That being said, given some of the research I've been reading lately, I'm willing to bet that we're going to see a true AI develop in the next ten years. I do agree that we are on the verge of a massive shift in technology and the thinking about such, but to project the future on what we have now does the existing tools a disservice.
no subject
"I see them as an extension to our own consciousnesses at the moment." This statement is basically the foundation of my own position. Google, for instance, emerges from the amassed consciousness of humans on the net, and in my opinion is already an artificial intelligence. That's why I perceive computing anthropologically. Sometimes in a piece of software I think I see hints of the person, or crowd, who created it.
"...without us, at the moment, they would falter and eventually fail. So would children. So would horses on a farm, and they were servants for a long time.
no subject
Could you please give big bags of money to several of the more talented and prolific open source coders, so they can go out and start creating or porting a whole bunch of applications to Linux, and thus shooting that particular problem in the head? That way, I can spend my money buying gifts for my friends instead of splitting it all between the EFF and the ACLU?
I've been a pretty good girl this year, and I can tell you for certain that the boys and girls at Sony have been *very* bad. Save me, Santa wan Kenobi; you're my only hope.
...Your Friend Tracy
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject