Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> if a company advertises a product as a walled garden, specifically claims that one of the things it does is to vet and prohibit apps which violate their guidelines

Could you please show me such an advertisement? I do not really follow Apple, and have failed to encounter it.

Further, what if I'm a user, who wants to purchase the hardware (and even operating system), but does not want the added security. Mind you that Apple has their own CPU and OS which is unlike anything in the competition. Don't I also buy the product for those benefits, and don't I have a right as a consumer to opt out of arbitrary limitations that I have no option but accepting?

In the past, you had no option but accepting tracking cookies in every website, GDPR showed that as a society, we decided to force companies to provide an option.




> Further, what if I'm a user, who wants to purchase the hardware (and even operating system), but does not want the added security. Mind you that Apple has their own CPU and OS which is unlike anything in the competition.

Tough luck my friend. I mean only because you want something unreasonable doesn't make it a right.

Example:

What if I want to buy the engine of a Ferrari but not pay the price for a Ferrari and just have it inside a Volkswagen?

The answer to that is also tough luck. You want a Ferrari engine, well it only comes in a bloody Ferrari so either buy the whole thing and then mod it yourself or tough luck. Same for Apple hardware. If you want just want one piece then you'll have to buy the whole thing and mod it yourself.

Nothing in this world gives you a right to have all your wishes fulfilled by others.


If Ferrari and Volkswagen are only two companies in world and Ferrari disallows changing Radio and Car Seat without authorization from company. I would say screw them, law should prohibit this. If you don't like the law you are free to go sale somewhere else.


If Ferrari and Volkswagen are the only two companies in the world, you just go and build a third company with a unique proposition. There's enough capital around to build a new car maker, the problem is the lack of appealing value and necessity for another clone.


Isn't though the point of software, to be easily transferable from device to device? Otherwise we've just reinvented hardware.

My point is that a car is a complete piece of hardware, all of which is necessary for it to fulfil its purpose, while computers have the advantage (over other machines) to be easily modified by software.

You are correct that my wishes should not affect others, but what about the wishes/needs of multiple people? Even if it's just a wish/personal preference, and not a fundamental property of software, should people's opinion affect private corporations directly?

All of this assuming that there are multiple people who agree with the notion of software freedom.


> You are correct that my wishes should not affect others, but what about the wishes/needs of multiple people?

If people in your neighbourhood wish and need that you mown their lawn regularly for free, would you be happy to consider it? After all, it's multiple people's preference!


There are multiple instances where this is done in all societies. For example taxes are an indirect way to do so. Mandatory military service is another. Jury duty, or staffing vote counting for elections, etc etc


they all are a great example of a violation of the same moral principle, and you are right that taxes are an indirect way of saying "give it to me or else", which is in the same category of "we claim your finite time on this earth so that you pursue our goals instead of your own, and if you refuse we will make sure you will regret it"




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: