←back to thread

Is it possible to allow sideloading and keep users safe?

(shkspr.mobi)
205 points ColinWright | 1 comments | 30 Aug 25 12:03 UTC | HN request time: 0.198s | source
Show context
barnabee ◴[30 Aug 25 13:17 UTC] No.45074392[source]▶
> 00. Users should be free to run whatever code they like.

> 01. Vulnerable members of society should be protected from scams.

00: yes, always; 01: yes, but not at the expense of 00 (or probably some other things)

replies(1): >>45074851 #
snowe2010 ◴[30 Aug 25 14:11 UTC] No.45074851[source]▶
Why? What’s your logic and reasoning?
replies(2): >>45081145 #>>45081259 #
bigstrat2003 ◴[31 Aug 25 07:28 UTC] No.45081145[source]▶
Safety is not a valid reason to limit freedom. We cannot, and should not try to, keep people safe from their own bad decisions. That is treating adults like children, which is offensive to human dignity.
replies(1): >>45081524 #
throwaway2037 ◴[31 Aug 25 08:37 UTC] No.45081524[source]▶

    > Safety is not a valid reason to limit freedom.
What about (a) speed limits, (b) drink driving laws, (c) seat belt laws, and (d) helmet laws for bicycle and motorcycle riders? I assume in your world view that all of these categories are "limiting your freedom". I am fine with all of them.
replies(1): >>45082419 #
namibj ◴[31 Aug 25 11:40 UTC] No.45082419[source]▶
a and b are about 3rd party safety. C.f. gun safe mandates.
replies(1): >>45112463 #
1. snowe2010 ◴[03 Sep 25 05:21 UTC] No.45112463[source]▶
Your phone getting hacked and you texting me with it can put me in danger. Your bank account getting hacked and me needing to send you money can put me in dire straights. Your back porch camera getting hacked and the footage of me and you getting uploaded can get me killed.

The logic that your device security isn’t tied to my safety needs to be rethunk. Every leaked password reduces password security for everyone. Every successful phish makes the next phish easier.

Your device safety is tied to my wellbeing.