Doctorow on the War on General Purpose Computing 360
Cory Doctorow has posted the content of his talk delivered at Google this month on what he calls the coming civil war over general purpose computing. He neatly crystallizes the problem with certain types of (widely called-for) regulation of devices and the software they run — and they all run software. The ability to stop a general purpose computer from doing nearly anything (running code without permission from the mothership, or requiring an authorities-only engine kill switch, or preventing a car from speeding away), he says boils down to a demand: "Make me a general-purpose computer that runs all programs except for one program that freaks me out."
"But there's a problem. We don't know how to make a computer that can run all the programs we can compile except for whichever one pisses off a regulator, or disrupts a business model, or abets a criminal. The closest approximation we have for such a device is a computer with spyware on it— a computer that, if you do the wrong thing, can intercede and say, 'I can't let you do that, Dave.'"
all in all (Score:5, Interesting)
The article in full is a very interesting argument for why we will all regret our eagerness to embrace the "walled garden".
Has everyone forgotten the days when your computer actually belonged to you? The days before computing was more than just shopping?
Do you own your PS3 or your Xbox 360?
How did we reach a point where we will so willingly turn over our individual agency to Apple, Microsoft, Sony? Or AT&T and Comcast? Who here believes that those companies can be trusted to look out for our best interests?
Glitch in the Matrix... (Score:3, Interesting)
11 of 9 comments loaded
Re:all in all (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't buy GM (Score:4, Interesting)
The only companies that will put these sort of features in are usually defending some other business model. So Apple will put in measures to defend iTunes. Google will put in measures to defend their store, and it looks like Microsoft is thinking about measures to defend either their OS or their store.
But does anyone really think that the server manufacturers are going to make servers that make it hard to install Linux? Also Microsoft is becoming weaker and weaker. They certainly have some weight to throw around but even if they bully a few desktop manufacturers into forcing some protection onto their systems no doubt they will just release a "server only" motherboard that doesn't have any protection and is a complete copy of the desktop except something like the BIOS will boot up and say "Server BIOS". Not to mention that other MB manufacturers will just tell MS to go pound sand.
Also does anyone think that say the Raspberry Pi will give a hoot as to what MS has to say?
The real war on General purpose computing is the trend people using smart phones and tablets. These devices do almost everything the average user needs. It is the more power user types who need what is becoming the specialty hardware of a desktop that they can control. As a programmer I need to be able to install the OpenCV libraries and whatnot but my mother wants the fewest clicks to get to her mail.
Also keep in mind that the seemingly locked down iPhone has done as well as it has due to the fact that it is far less locked down than the phones that proceeded it including the blackberry. Often you would buy a phone from Telus or Sprint only to find that they had crippled some features such as custom ring tones so as to sell you ring tones. When Apple introduced the iPhone they didn't let the Telcos crap up their phones. Can you imagine what the Telcos would have done to the iPhones if they could. All kinds of custom backgrounds, remove the app store and replace it with one of their own, make it so you can't upload your own music, can't surf via WiFi. Again these companies would have crippled the iPhone to protect their other business model.
Again as a programmer if Apple were to lock down the next version of the OS, I would not upgrade and then begin exploring other options. As it stands my next phone will almost certainly be something like an Openmoko.
PS The business model that GM seems to be defending is the fact that the government is their primary lifeline. They know who is buttering their bread and it certainly isn't the consumer.
Overblown (Score:5, Interesting)
I can still go to Newegg.com and order a bunch of commodity parts and assemble a general purpose computer, install a completely FLOSS operating system and all the software I want on it. I can load it up with quad GPUs for password cracking, terabytes of storage for all my pirated media and warez, run TOR and Truecrypt, and all sorts of other "evil" features. If there's a war on general purpose computing it's clear which side is winning.
As it stands now, an individual has never had more access to computing power, bandwidth, and data than they do now. Yes, there are locked down boxes you can buy if you're not interested in all that, but individual components are still being sold. There's a thriving market for computer hardware that isn't going to disappear any time soon, and neither will the free software made to run on such hardware. As little as $35 (or whatever the Raspberry Pi costs) gets you a "general purpose computer", albeit a very simple and underpowered one.
Walled gardens can peacefully co-exist without threatening general purpose computing.
And as we've seen from every iOS device, even walled gardens don't keep people locked in if they are determined to leave. If you make compelling hardware people will always find ways to use it how they wish. I can easily take root control over my iPhone if I wanted to. Same is true for Android devices.
Who really cares? (Score:2, Interesting)
I've got karma to burn, so here goes.
As I get older I want to tinker with my machines less and I want them to just work more. That means that my home setup has gone from a half dozen servers all running a variety of Windows and Linux/BSD operating systems to one simple desktop with ESXi. All the VMs are backed up automatically, they're upgraded automatically (to stable versions -- I don't care about bleeding edge anymore), and they basically don't need to be touched for months and months and months. It means my desktop computer has gone from multibooting various flavours of Linux with Wine to just... Windows 7.
Why?
I just want things to work.
I don't want to spend hours trying to get Wine to run World of Warcraft better, I just buy a new video card and be done with it. I use an iPhone because its working is binary; either it works perfectly, more or less easily, or it doesn't work at all and I'm not tempted by some half-broken package that if I tinker with it enough will be mostly stable (this version). It just works or it doesn't, and there's nothing an iPhone can't do that I care enough to go Android. Who really care if you can't telnet to your phone? Really?
Windows 7 just works. My iPhone just works. That's what I want my machines to do.
After all, if you work for your machines, who owns who?
Re:Already there... (Score:4, Interesting)
Freedom, security, stability. Choose two.
Most people have chosen security and stability. I prefer freedom and stability. If the machine is unwilling or cannot run the programs I create, I have no use for it (save it were an AI, but that's an entirely different situation); were I a carpenter, and my tools unsuited for carpentry, what use would they be to me?
Same exact thing with cars (Score:1, Interesting)
A car with a computer in it that prevents the car from hitting another car also prevents you from deliberately ramming other cars. We use our brains to make a judgement that it is worth it on balance. And no, we can't make a car that never ever crashes, but we can take legitimate steps to reduce crashes significantly, and in fact it is immoral to do any other thing.
The main thing people want from a computer is also not to crash. Not just literal crashes where the kernel panics, but also getting a virus that takes the machine down, or having data stolen, or being added to a botnet, or even just doing something that requires the user to stop their own work and put on an I-T hat and do some maintenance. We have to do everything we can to reduce those crashes, because again, it is immoral not to. If a computer wastes 30 minutes of a user's time per week, that is more than one day of their life per year your lousy computing product is stealing from that user. And 30 minutes per week is low.
Once again, Doctorow describes a Nerd Utopia where the other 90% of humanity die in car crashes and spend a day or more out of every year working around unproductive computer behavior. All to satisfy Nerd Dogma. The 90% is not interested. They did not even buy PC's — nerds did, business replaced their typewriters with them, and then sales topped out at 350 million per year, making up an installed base of about 1 billion PC's at any one time. The regular person does not want a general purpose computer that can configure. They want iPods: an easy-to-use device that has 100 specific features that never stop working, does specific tasks in a transparent manner, and yet provides the benefits of computing, and gets better via software updates.
iPad is not a general purpose computer — it only does about 1 million things. However, the regular consumer, armed with a general purpose computer can typically accomplish only a handful of things, and all of those are well within the 1 million things iPad does. That is why Nerds say iPad does less than a PC and everyone else says iPad does more.
A general purpose computer is like a workshop where you can go in and with a little work, make any tool. To some people that is Nirvana — to most, it is a grim jail cell. An iPad is a Swiss Army knife with 1 million tools inside, all ready to use. Nerds have to understand, for most people that is not just enough tools do they don't need a general purpose computer, they are also thankful that iPad has saved them from PC's. And there are plenty of True Nerds who find an iPad on the coffee table is Just Fine Thank-You. The monster workstation is still there in the Nerd Cave for your bash scripts.
To me, I don't think you have to do anything more on this issue but compare the first 5 years of Windows XP malware (seemingly infinite — at one point XP malware was the majority of Internet traffic) to the first 5 years of iOS native malware (zero.) END OF DEBATE. The iOS devices were online most of the time via various wireless networks and had no I-T managing them. They went from 16 native apps to 600,000. iOS should be awash in native malware but it has zero and that is the MINIMUM acceptable behavior for a consumer computer. An iPad has to be as reliable as paper.
And BTW — the same company that makes these blasphemous consumer computers that don't crash, also runs 4 giant developer programs (Mac, iOS, Safari, iTunes,) one of the most successful open source projects ever (WebKit,) and their instructions for how to make iTunes Extras/LP include bash commands. There is another side to the coin. They are serving the consumer computing user with iOS which does exactly what they want and serving developers and creatives with the Mac, which can do anything. To Buddhists, Mac OS and iOS are yin and yang, it is obvious. You can't make one thing for everybody. Doctorow is assuming that there will be only one kind of computer, either general purpose or not. No. Nobody is taking away your Unix. (Your Windows is
Re:all in all (Score:5, Interesting)
Will you feel the same when the most powerful Intel processors lock out your choice of OS?
I suppose if you don't mind using underpowered hardware, and being very limited in your choices of peripherals and software, then you're OK, but that's not the way things have been. Until now, those of us who want a general purpose machine with which to do things (instead of to buy things) have been able to choose among the most powerful personal computing hardware.
No, the Raspberry Pi is not my idea of a general purpose computer. It's great to use in limited applications, but not as an all-around workhorse.
Re:Welcome to 2006, Cory Doctorow (Score:4, Interesting)
And perhaps you would like to argue that things are getting better instead?
Processors have bumped up against Murphy's Law. Multiple cores only go so far.
Windows 8 is scaring a large number of IT implementers.
Apple is {comment redacted}.
Google has become the US Government's willing bitch; the search results it returns are pure trash.
A fair number of judges, everywhere, lacking any understanding about how technology or freedom of speech works, have opted for a (holds at arm's length, with a gloved hand) social policy that undermines both, with their horrible rulings on 'deep linking / linking to copyrighted works.'
For some odd reason, we need a cyber-army now. Haven't had one for the past two decades when technology was actually evolving, but now that the power is flowing away from tech, we suddenly need one. I could have sworn that all the IT out there was the cyber-army, seeing as they know how to secure devices better than most wanna-be security experts, but then, company policy has been a brake on that for years.
Re:Same exact thing with cars (Score:5, Interesting)
To me, I don't think you have to do anything more on this issue but compare the first 5 years of Windows XP malware (seemingly infinite â" at one point XP malware was the majority of Internet traffic) to the first 5 years of iOS native malware (zero.) END OF DEBATE
End of debate? Really? I would have thought the debate ended when Apple decided that the Bush II countdown app was not allowed on iPhone because it might offend Republicans, but then again, maybe I care more about free speech than I care about run-of-the-mill viruses (don't think for a moment that an intelligence agency could not create the iPhone equivalent of Stuxnet).
Nobody is taking away your Unix
This is not about Unix, this is about my ability to run the programs I want to run and to use my computer to do the things I want to do, and yes, that includes my ability to copy files without permission. If I want to run an Obama countdown app, why should I be prevented from doing so? Heaven forbid Democrats might be offended, right?
It is a sad day when we can honestly say that Windows users have more freedom than Linux users, but that is where we are now (but not for much longer it seems). Everyone loves it when their computers "just work," but when their computers start saying, "No you cannot play that movie, "No you never purchased 1984," and "That file is not allowed to be printed, except for a few author-selected paragraphs" people will suddenly demand their PCs back -- and by then it will be too late.
Your topic is irrelevant... (Score:4, Interesting)
People should at least know a couple of things. Some companies make computer hardware, and some companies make computer software. Software is something that works on computer hardware. It "can" be the case that the same companies who make the the hardware could also make the software, but this is NOT implied. In the past, we've had the pleasure that we could get our software from anyone because the PC design philosophy was "open".
The standard car analogy may suffice here. Some companies make cars. Some companies make gas. We don't buy "Ford" or "Chevrolet" gas do we? But the analogy gets deeper than this. The gas is seen as the OS in this analogy. We figure that if we put in a single type of gas, example "Ford" gas, we can still travel where we want. But the problem is that the "Ford" gas will only work on certain highways that the car maker will allow us to go down. Going forward in the computer industry, this exactly what is going on. If you use Apple computers and devices for example, you can only view the world through Apple's lens.
Torchwood (Score:4, Interesting)
Do you know Torchwood? The very first episode was that the policewoman find Torchwood and gets in the headquarter. After she gets out Jack drugs her with an amnesia-pill and she runs home and write everything about Torchwood in her PC before she fells asleep and forgets everything. Before she almost felt asleep, Torchwood control her PC, the PC goes blank and everything she wrote is gone.
Free operating systems are a thread to every government, because such controls are impossible on a system that can be modified by the user. If you think it's scri-fiction: the TPM [wikipedia.org] chips are around since at least 2006.
TPM is for "Trusted Platform Module". Of course the "Trusted" part is that a third party can trust your PC that you didn't change it in any undesired way.
Re:Oh shit! (Score:5, Interesting)
The fact is that the world is divided between users of the Macintosh computer and users of MS-DOS compatible computers. I am firmly of the opinion that the Macintosh is Catholic and that DOS is Protestant. Indeed, the Macintosh is counter-reformist and has been influenced by the ratio studiorum of the Jesuits. It is cheerful, friendly, conciliatory; it tells the faithful how they must proceed step by step to reach -- if not the kingdom of Heaven -- the moment in which their document is printed. It is catechistic: The essence of revelation is dealt with via simple formulae and sumptuous icons. Everyone has a right to salvation.
DOS is Protestant, or even Calvinistic. It allows free interpretation of scripture, demands difficult personal decisions, imposes a subtle hermeneutics upon the user, and takes for granted the idea that not all can achieve salvation. To make the system work you need to interpret the program yourself: Far away from the baroque community of revelers, the user is closed within the loneliness of his own inner torment.
You may object that, with the passage to Windows, the DOS universe has come to resemble more closely the counter-reformist tolerance of the Macintosh. It's true: Windows represents an Anglican-style schism, big ceremonies in the cathedral, but there is always the possibility of a return to DOS to change things in accordance with bizarre decisions: When it comes down to it, you can decide to ordain women and gays if you want to.
Umberto Eco, 1994 [themodernword.com]
Re:all in all (Score:4, Interesting)
What the hell? Free ride? I paid for my hardware, thank you.
It's called "raising the drawbridge". Once a group of worthless greedy assholes used some existing wonderful resource or phenomenon for their own benefit, assholes are eager to destroy it, so no one can use it to challenge them in the future. To justify this, they claim that others are "freeloaders" and "don't deserve" to use something as great as the resource being destroyed.
Among other examples are "international" patents on drugs and other patent-related bullshit, copyrights and trademarks on formerly freely-distributable material (from Disney to Tivo-ization), and even "non-proliferation of nuclear weapons" when promoted by the country that can be only deterred from invasion by nuclear weapons.
Only ourselves to blame (Score:4, Interesting)
If the end comes, which I don't believe just that general purpose computers will go back to being a more specialist/expensive tool, then we, the technologists, will only have ourselves to blame.
The reason this is happening is because we have just cared about the other tech users. We've poured scorn on people that click on the wrong link and download a virus. We've tutted at those people that don't know what a file-system is, or why one is better than others. We've laughed when we've heard that someone is still running Windows ME. In short we've cared about ourselves, and our needs, rather than the needs of everyone.
If we had tried to make things simpler and harder to break, but still retained the flexibility, we could probably have done it but it was cooler to rewrite a device driver, or develop a new filesystem/GUI. We didn't, and this is the result.