diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html')
| -rw-r--r-- | talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html | 286 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 286 deletions
diff --git a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html b/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html deleted file mode 100644 index 7e12f59..0000000 --- a/talermerchantdemos/blog/articles/scrap1_37.html +++ /dev/null @@ -1,286 +0,0 @@ -<!-- This is the second edition of Free Software, Free Society: Selected Essays of Richard M. Stallman. - -Free Software Foundation - -51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor - -Boston, MA 02110-1335 -Copyright C 2002, 2010 Free Software Foundation, Inc. -Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire book are permitted -worldwide, without royalty, in any medium, provided this notice is -preserved. Permission is granted to copy and distribute translations -of this book from the original English into another language provided -the translation has been approved by the Free Software Foundation and -the copyright notice and this permission notice are preserved on all -copies. - -ISBN 978-0-9831592-0-9 -Cover design by Rob Myers. - -Cover photograph by Peter Hinely. - --> - - - <a name="The-Problem-Is-Software-Controlled-by-Its-Developer"> - </a> - <h1 class="chapter"> - 37. The Problem Is Software Controlled by Its Developer - </h1> - <a name="index-Zittrain_002c-Jonathan"> - </a> - <p> - I fully agree with Jonathan Zittrain’s conclusion that we should not -abandon general-purpose computers. Alas, I disagree completely with -the path that led him to it. He presents serious security problems as -an intolerable crisis, but I’m not convinced. Then he forecasts that -users will panic in response and stampede toward restricted computers -(which he calls “appliances”), but there is no sign of this happening. - </p> - <a name="index-zombie-machines"> - </a> - <a name="index-phishing"> - </a> - <p> - Zombie machines are a problem, but not a catastrophe. Moreover, far -from panicking, most users ignore the issue. Today, people are indeed -concerned about the danger of phishing (mail and web pages that -solicit personal information for fraud), but using a browsing-only -device instead of a general computer won’t protect you from that. - </p> - <a name="index-Apple_002c-iPhone-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029"> - </a> - <p> - Meanwhile, Apple has reported that 25 percent of iPhones have been -unlocked. Surely at least as many users would have preferred an -unlocked iPhone but were afraid to try a forbidden recipe to obtain -it. This refutes the idea that users generally prefer that their -devices be locked. - </p> - <a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-Adobe-Flash"> - </a> - <a name="index-proprietary-software_002c-spying-on-users-1"> - </a> - <p> - It is true that a general computer lets you run programs designed to -spy on you, restrict you, or even let the developer attack you. Such -programs include - <a name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-1"> - </a> - KaZaA, RealPlayer, Adobe Flash, - <a name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-2"> - </a> - Windows Media Player, -Microsoft - <a name="index-Windows-4"> - </a> - Windows, and MacOS. - <a name="index-Windows_002c-Vista-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-1"> - </a> - Windows Vista does all three of those -things; it also lets Microsoft change the software without asking, or -command it to permanently cease normal functioning. - </p> - <p> - But restricted computers are no help, because they present the -same problem for the same reason. - </p> - <p> - The iPhone is designed for remote attack by Apple. When Apple remotely -destroys iPhones that users have unlocked to enable other uses, that -is no better than when Microsoft remotely sabotages - <a name="index-Vista_002c-Windows-_0028see-also-both-Windows-and-DRM_0029-2"> - </a> - Vista. The - <a name="index-TiVo-_0028see-also-tivoization_0029"> - </a> - <a name="index-tivoization-5"> - </a> - TiVo is -designed to enforce restrictions on access to the recordings you make, -and reports what you watch. - <a name="index-e_002dbooks-4"> - </a> - E-book readers such as the - <a name="index-Amazon-2"> - </a> - Amazon - <a name="index-Swindle-2"> - </a> - “Swindle” are designed to stop you from sharing and lending your -books. Features that artificially obstruct use of your data are known - <a name="index-DRM_002c-call-it-_0060_0060Digital-Restrictions-Management_0027_0027-5"> - </a> - <a name="index-_0060_0060Digital-Rights-Management_002c_0027_0027-avoid-use-of-term-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-1"> - </a> - as Digital Restrictions Management (DRM); our protest campaign against -DRM is hosted at - <a name="index-Defective-by-Design-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-4"> - </a> - <a href="http://defectivebydesign.org"> - http://defectivebydesign.org - </a> - . (Our adversaries call DRM -“Digital Rights Management” based on their idea that restricting you -is their right. When you choose a term, you choose your side.) - </p> - <p> - The nastiest of the common restricted devices are - <a name="index-cell-phones-_0028see-also-both-OpenMoko-and-Apple_0029"> - </a> - cell phones. They -transmit signals for tracking your whereabouts even when switched -“off”; the only way to stop this is to take out all the -batteries. Many can also be turned on remotely, for listening, -unbeknownst to you. (The - <a name="index-FBI-1"> - </a> - FBI is already taking advantage of this -feature, and the - <a name="index-Commerce-Department_002c-US"> - </a> - US Commerce Department lists this danger in its -Security Guide.) Cellular phone network companies regularly install -software in users phones, without asking, to impose new usage -restrictions. - </p> - <p> - With a general computer you can escape by rejecting such programs. You -don’t have to have KaZaA, RealPlayer, Adobe Flash, - <a name="index-Windows-Media-Player-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-3"> - </a> - Windows Media -Player, Microsoft Windows or - <a name="index-MacOS-_0028see-also-DRM_0029"> - </a> - MacOS on your computer (I don’t). By -contrast, a restricted computer gives you no escape from the software -built into it. - <a name="index-KaZaA-_0028see-also-both-DRM-and-treacherous-computing_0029-2"> - </a> - <a name="index-Adobe-Flash-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-RealPlayer-_0028see-also-DRM_0029-2"> - </a> - </p> - <a name="index-development_002c-developer-control"> - </a> - <p> - The root of this problem, both in general PCs and restricted -computers, is software controlled by its developer. The developer -(typically a corporation) controls what the program does, and prevents -everyone else from changing it. If the developer decides to put in -malicious features, even a master programmer cannot easily remove -them. - </p> - <a name="index-users_002c-benefit-to-4"> - </a> - <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-insist-on-free-software"> - </a> - <p> - The remedy is to give the users more control, not less. We must insist -on free/libre software, software that the users are free to change and -redistribute. Free/libre software develops under the control of its -users: if they don’t like its features, for whatever reason, they can -change them. If you’re not a programmer, you still get the benefit of -control by the users. A programmer can make the improvements you would -like, and publish the changed version. Then you can use it too. - </p> - <a name="index-malware"> - </a> - <p> - With free/libre software, no one has the power to make a malicious -feature stick. Since the source code is available to the users, -millions of programmers are in a position to spot and remove the -malicious feature and release an improved version; surely someone -will do it. Others can then compare the two versions -to verify independently which version treats users right. As a practical -fact, free software is generally free of designed-in malware. - </p> - <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-price-deception"> - </a> - <p> - Many people do acquire restricted devices, but not for motives of -security. Why do people choose them? - </p> - <p> - Sometimes it is because the restricted devices are physically -smaller. I edit text all day (literally) and I find the keyboard and -screen of a laptop well worth the size and weight. However, people who -use computers differently may prefer something that fits in a -pocket. In the past, these devices have typically been restricted, but -they weren’t chosen for that reason. - </p> - <p> - Now they are becoming less restricted. In fact, the - <a name="index-OpenMoko-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029"> - </a> - OpenMoko cell -phone features a main computer running entirely free/libre software, -including the GNU/Linux operating system normally used on PCs and -servers. - </p> - <a name="index-games_002c-price-deception-and"> - </a> - <p> - A major cause for the purchase of some restricted computers is -financial sleight of hand. Game consoles, and the iPhone, are sold for an -unsustainably low price, and the manufacturers subsequently charge when you use -them. Thus, game developers must pay the game console manufacturer to -distribute a game, and they pass this cost on to the -user. Likewise, - <a name="index-AT_0026T"> - </a> - AT&T pays Apple when an iPhone is used as a -telephone. The low up-front price misleads customers into thinking -they will save money. - <a name="index-Apple_002c-iPhone-_0028see-also-cell-phones_0029-1"> - </a> - </p> - <p> - If we are concerned about the spread of restricted computers, we -should tackle the issue of the price deception that sells them. -If we are concerned about malware, we should insist on free -software that gives the users control. - <a name="index-call-to-action_002c-price-deception-1"> - </a> - <a name="index-malware-1"> - </a> - </p> - <a name="Postnote"> - </a> - <h3 class="subheading"> - Postnote - </h3> - <a name="index-development_002c-patents-2"> - </a> - <p> - Zittrain’s suggestion to reduce the statute of limitations -on software patent lawsuits is a tiny step in the right direction, but -it is much easier to solve the whole problem. Software patents are an -unnecessary, artificial danger imposed on all software developers and -users in the US. Every program is a combination of many methods and -techniques—thousands of them in a large program. If patenting these -methods is allowed, then hundreds of those used in a given program are -probably patented. (Avoiding them is not feasible; there may be no -alternatives, or the alternatives may be patented too.) So the -developers of the program face hundreds of potential lawsuits from -parties unknown, and the users can be sued as well. - </p> - <p> - The complete, simple solution is to eliminate patents from the field -of software. Since the patent system is created by statute, eliminating -patents from software will be easy given sufficient political -will. (See - <a href="http://www.endsoftpatents.org"> - http://www.endsoftpatents.org - </a> - .) - <a name="index-Zittrain_002c-Jonathan-1"> - </a> - </p> - <hr size="2"/> - |