Hacker News Reader

Comment by 1vuio0pswjnm7 | Hacker News Reader

"I'm am just an outlier here?"

No. The "banking app doesn't work" argument against non-corporate mobile OS, raised incessantly is HN comments, is bogus

I want a "phone", i.e., small form factor computer, that can run something like NetBSD, or Linux. But I have no intention of using it for commercial transactions. Mobile banking is not why I want to run a non-corporate OS

I want to use it for recreation, research and experimentation

NB. I have more than one "phone". The choice is not corporate mobile OS versus non-corporate mobile OS, i.e., "either-or". I can use both, each for specific purposes

View on HN

> I want a "phone", i.e., small form factor computer, that can run something like NetBSD, or Linux. But I have no intention of using it for commercial transactions. Mobile banking is not why I want to run a non-corporate OS

> I want to use it for recreation, research and experimentation

I am a firm believer that phones are personal computers and should have all the end user freedom we have come to expect from personal computers. I am totally behind what your saying. (The amount of irrational anger that wells up in me when I hear someone make the argument that phones are somehow not general purpose personal computers and shouldn't provider their owners software freedom would astound you.)

Personally, I opt out of services that require the use of phone "apps" and any potential attestation they provide. Unfortunately, I just offload those needs onto my wife and her iPhone.

Want to go to a concert in a TicketMaster venue? You have to have a phone. Pay to park in some places requires a phone. Mobile ordering for some restaurants requires a phone.

I don't think it should be this way, but it is. I think we need consumer regulation to insure software freedom on phones and curtail awful user hostile "features" like remote attestation.

Until that happens (if it ever does) there is a realpolitik with needing corporate phones for some activities that can't be denied.

So the world should cared to your needs when literally almost every adult has a phone even in third world countries?

Before you say “what about the poor people” in the US at least, even poor people can get a subsidized free phone through the UCF (?) government fund

Also see: no I’m not going to waste development time di you can get to a website I develop with JS disabled or so you can use lynx

Because phones keep tracking us and stealing our attention.

And everybody should have the option of open computer systems

So exactly how do you think an “open phone” will keep you from being tracked when you are tracked and can be triangulated via cell phone towers?

He's referring to his activity ON THE DEVICE. We know you can't stop the location tracking from the carrier. But that doesn't mean give up on everything else.

Worrying about random app tracking you - which is a boogeyman in and of itself on iOS - and nog worrying about the government tracking you is like being concerned about a mosquito bite when you have a bullet hole.

The faraday bag I keep with me in my backpack!

> So the world should cared to your needs when literally almost every adult has a phone even in third world countries?

The assumption that everyone has a "smart phone" running locked-down Android or iOS is unreasonable. Just as race, sex, religion, national origin, etc, are protected classes, the "phoneless" should be a protected class. Denying people who choose not to use a locked down phone basic interaction with your business should be legally equivalent to posting a "No blacks allowed" sign on your door, and the consequences should be the same.

> Also see: no I’m not going to waste development time di you can get to a website I develop with JS disabled or so you can use lynx

I don't see what this non-sequitur has to do with the exchange. I didn't bring anything up about Javascript.

Oh please, really? As a Black guy whose still living parents grew up in the segregated South. Comparing not being able to use a Linux phone to segregation is really taking it too far. You have not a single clue what it was like growing up in the Jim Crow South.

This conversation is officially done.

Those things that you mentioned you can do it on the website meaning also a open computer too

> Those things that you mentioned you can do it on the website

No, unfortunately some things can't be. There are venues that provide tickets exclusively via mobile applications, for instance.

Well fuck those venues. It's a small percentage. I've never run into one and I live in LA, a city with hundreds if not thousands of venues.

So you only get 98% of the world instead of 100%. That 98% is far more than the the 100% of 10 years ago. Everyone wants perfection when they've already got abundance.

It has been reported that Ticketmaster has exclusive agreements with 70-80% of US venues. It's great that you have all the choices you do. For me, in western Ohio, every major venue for hundreds of miles in every direction is an exclusive Ticketmaster venue. You can't gain admittance to any show in those venues without a phone that can run their proprietary app.

Ticketmaster is bullshit, for sure, but they're just one example of the problem of being forced to use proprietary user-hostile software.

See this is the bullshit I'm taking about. You can print ticketmaster tickets.

So much self victimization to avoid using open alternatives.

> See this is the bullshit I'm taking about. You can print ticketmaster tickets.

So much confidence for an incorrect answer. As cited elsewhere in the thread, some venues are "no app, no entry", and do not have paper tickets.

Once again, never heard of this. It must be a rare exception because ticketmaster allows you to print them. Back to my 98% argument.

Can you cite a venue that won't take printed tickets?

Edit: it looks like NFL doesn't take them, BUT you can go to the box office with an order number and still get in, so same thing.

"There are venues that provide tickets exclusively via mobile applications, for instance."

Turns out Ticketmaster still has ticket printing machines at such venues

Was at a game at one of them, claimed I had a problem with the app and after some negotiation at the ticket window a millennial printed me a ticket

Why do they still have the printers

The "I'm having a problem with the app" strategy can work in other contexts too. The phone can be configured so that a young person trying to help gives up

"Modern" software is highly fallible and everyone knows it

Ticketmaster is it's own particular problem that needs to be dealt with, even if it is emblematic of a bigger issue with companies demanding users to run proprietary software.

I have recent (October and November, 2025-- venues in Indianapolis, IN and Cincinnati, OH) personal experience with this. With one venue I was able to play the "confused old man" card (via phone) and get the box office to print my tickets and hold them at will call.

At another venue I called prior to my show and tried the same tactic. They told me flat out "no phone, no admittance, tough luck for you" and cited the warnings and terms on the Ticketmaster website that I'd already agreed-to. I didn't want to chance losing out on $300 of tickets I bought so I knuckled under and loaded the Ticketmaster app on my wife's iPhone.

I don't think it's as cut-and-dried as you say it is, and I don't have the stomach to risk being denied access to events I bought tickets for-- particularly at the pricing levels of today's shows.

When people have problems using apps, alternatives are often available

Perhaps this is why, e.g., venues that "require" apps still have ticket printing machines and still print tickets when there are problems with using the apps

The situation is not so "cut and dried" that no one ever attends an event at these venues using printed tickets instead of displaying the ticket on the phones they bring to the event

There are alternatives to apps that are sometimes used, e.g., when customers have problems, even when businesses try to "require" apps

As such, businesses do not always succeed in collecting the same amount of data from every customer

This is not to say customers who try to avoid unnecessary data collection always succeed, either

Generally, trying is a prequisite to succeeding

If most customers do not try it does not mean no customer succeeds. There are some who do, at least some of the time

Reply on news.ycombinator.com