Comment by pietrrrek
2 days ago
> In my experience, once the issue is framed as 'Google will decide what you can do with your phone' every single person is immediately outraged.
I've had a lengthy debate about this (in the context of right-to-repair) with a friend of mine who's outside tech and he genuinely held (still holds?) the opinion that the manufacturer has the "right" to decide how their products are used. I'm willing to bet that this is a common viewpoint of people outside the tech sphere, they just want a device that "works", which for them is essentially just "I can use apps from the App store".
> 'm willing to bet that this is a common viewpoint of people outside the tech sphere, they just want a device that "works", which for them is essentially just "I can use apps from the App store".
Perhaps some people were just conditioned to believe that these shackles are forced upon them for their own good, because only bad people would ever want to take them off.
Seriously, finding bootlickers aren't hard. The better question to ask is how many voters are bootlickers and that typically hovers around 20-30%, so the follow-up question should be what type of platform could capture the remaining 70-80% of the electorate?
Turns out right to repair laws are very popular with voters and small business owners. Maybe we all start to tread down that path more and figure out what sorts of regulations pressures companies into adopting open standards?
Did you ask whether your friend have a car? I think it's much easier to get the point if the story comes to someone's 10 year old but still okay cars.
e.g. Without proper regulations, your maintenance can become nearly impossible.
I mean I agree with you. But also, it's not that unreasonable of an opinion. As long as it's coupled with optionality, which I think is the actual issue. Well the actual "issue" is that most people don't care or think that much at all about it. HN is a very special crowd.
For people who are just technology consumers they don’t see what could be offered, only what is. This is so frustrating when one understands how railroaded everyone is into maximizing platform ad revenue while holding the reasons people go on the platforms out as a carrot on a stick that gets further and further away. It’s 300 PHD psychologists vs someone just trying to keep up with their family.
It's really kind of gross. Psychologists should know best about what kind of damage the social media shit does.
1 reply →