topic: technology

Everything I’ve written on the subject, from the beginning of this version of the site.

I may also have written on this on earlier versions of my website:

  1. 2006 – 2011 (link coming soon!)
  2. did not have a blog!
  3. 2012 – 2013 (link coming soon!)
  4. 2014 – 2019
  • 2019

  • 2021

    • Jan

      • 26

        • 15:15↩︎ —  — NOTES

          One of the very strongest arguments for ending the App Store monopsony — that it is by definition user-hostile precisely on security and privacy:

          The mere existence of such a killswitch is a moral hazard. If you can cut off your users’ privacy  —  or their tools that improve competition or undo lock-in  —  then you invite others to demand that these tools be used to their advantage. The fact that Apple devices are designed to prevent users from overriding the company’s veto over their computing makes it inevitable that some gov­ernment will demand that this veto be exercised in their favor. After all, the Chinese government wasn’t the first state to demand that Apple expose its customers to surveillance  —  that was the Obama administration, which sought a back-door for Apple’s devices in order to investigate the San Bernardino terrorist attack. Apple resisted the US government demands, something it was able to do because the US constitution constrained the government’s ability to compel action. China faces no such constraint.…

          That means that any government that orders Apple to use its killswitches to achieve its goals knows that Apple’s customers will be helpless before such an order.

          On the other hand, what if Apple  —  by design  —  made [it] possible for users to override its killswitches?

           — Cory Doctorow, Neofeudalism and the Digital Manor
      • 27

        • 10:25↩︎ —  — NOTES

          On systems thinking” as somehow unlocking our much-desired control over our world:

          …self-organizing, nonlinear, feedback systems are inherently unpredictable. They are not controllable. They are understandable only in the most general way. The goal of foreseeing the future exactly and preparing for it perfectly is unrealizable. The idea of making a complex system do just what you want it to do can be achieved only temporarily, at best. We can never fully understand our world, not in the way our reductionistic science has led us to expect. Our science itself, from quantum theory to the mathematics of chaos, leads us into irreducible uncertainty. For any objective other than the most trivial, we can’t optimize; we don’t even know what to optimize. We can’t keep track of everything. We can’t find a proper, sustainable relationship to nature, each other, or the institutions we create, if we try to do it from the role of omniscient conqueror.

           — Donella Meadows, Dancing With Systems
    • Aug