Hacker News Reader

Comment by mlacks | Hacker News Reader

I think the problem is when someone isn't able to decide what's best for their computer - and then decides to blame the vendor.

The vendor has already distributed the software with the QA done as thoroughly as possible/ practical, issued a TOS denying a warranty or any sort of protection from failure - that we all agreed to - and yet the litigation is inevitable if something happens to the end-user on account of a vulnerability in the software.

Its not their computer, but in our litigation-happy cultural climate, its their responsibility. No one is preventing us from doing what we want with our computers with this flash issue - just reducing liability.

View on HN

This exactly and having a discussion as a society and the legal changes necessary will be a much harder solution that literally nobody except relatively diehard techies care about.

I care about true device ownership but there are like literally only probably what? 1000's 10's of thousands globally even a million or two globally of us isn't much compared to billions using the devices.

That's what gives me the crushing sadness. It's never going to rise to the level that individual consumers will care.

Only the "diehard techies" will care. Based on how many of my technical friends have knuckled-under and normalized these kinds of affronts to freedom apparently there are fewer "diehard techies" than I thought, too.

I wish that I could just "turn off" my love for computing and computers. Instead, I get to see my hobby and vocation die a long, painful death.

>It's never going to rise to the level that individual consumers will care.

Could it be possible that it's actually less of an issue than it seems to you?

>Only the "diehard techies" will care.

I'm a diehard techie and I do not care.

Let's have a conversation about "cyber" product liability as society, then, instead of leaving it up to the hardware manufacturers and software companies to decide.

Individuals should bear some of the liability for how their devices are used. If my device that I've opted to take off the vendor-prescribed updated train causes a public menace that should be my liability.

Automobiles are the model here. As an owner I am liable for any damage I cause by my operation of the automobile. However if there is a design defect (e.g. Toyota sticking accelerator, etc.) that I reasonably was unaware of, then the manufacturer has liability. But if I continue to drive my Toyota, knowing of the problem and ignoring the manufacturers recalls, then liability comes back to me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com