Apple Removes Apps from China Store That Help Internet Users Evade Censorship - <AUTHOR> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/29/technology/china-apple-censorhip.html <comment><USER2> You cannot do business in China without doing what they tell you. Period. Either you do it or you leave. I work for a big company (you would all know) and we have a large business unit in China, they own 52% of it. They decide what goes in and how customers can use it. We don't get to decide anything without government approval. It's so easy to claim the West shouldn't do what the leadership of China wants in China, but in reality the only alternative is to abandon China to those who will do what they are ordered to. The market is too large to leave. If you don't agree to their rules you don't play in their sandbox.

<comment><USER3> I suppose there are the questions of law and fiduciary duties.

If it's the law, it's the law. In China, it's the law to remove VPN apps. I suppose it's really not much different than the laws in the US that compel companies to give the government access to my information if they request such access. It's just the law, it's not really Facebook and Google trying to screw me.

All that said, I think what most posters are advocating is maybe for Apple to just leave China.

And, of course, that's where the other shoe drops...

with the question of fiduciary duties.

So yeah... I see your point... because of the legal issues involved, privacy and access can be tough problems. Not just in China or the US, but elsewhere in the world as well.

*EDITS for grammar

<comment><USER4> _> I suppose it's really not much different than the laws in the US that compel companies to give the government access to my information if they request such access._

It is very different. Censorship with the main objective of keeping an unelected regime in power by suppressing free speech is not the same as any problematic side-effects of fighting crime and terrorism. Granted, there are some grey areas such as oppression of sexual minorities, but the distinction between political oppression and crime fighting should not be lost completely.

The least Apple could do is allow sideloading of apps.

<comment><USER5> Basically this. Apple's walled garden puts them in a position of power where their only choices are comply or leave. By contrast, Google could ship an Android phone in China with vpn features removed, ban vpn apps from the play store, and I would still be able to install a 3rd party vpn app.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> What happens in China now could happen in 5 years in the rest of the world.

For "security" reasons or "fight agains terrorism", while it's really a fight between those in power and those who want power :-(

The need for IPFS, webRTC and other non-centralized protocols becomes more pressing every day, to defend everyone who is stuck in between.

<comment><USER7> there isn't going to be a technical solution to the problem of terrible world governments, the only real solution is going to be to change the governments.

<comment><USER8> In democratic countries, at least you have that possibility. Elsewhere it might not be possible at all. Nationwide censorship and surveillance are probably pretty effective technical "solutions" for preventing change.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Just common sense, given that the China gobertment has made usage of VPNs illegal.

What do you expect?

People in China could continue using app store accounts created in other countries as usual.

And most educated people continue using VPNs too. Normal people are becoming experts in encription, security...

It worries me more that countries like the UK and the US want to follow China, in that order.

<comment><USER10> I expect Apple to respect universal human rights regardless of the context. Freedom of speech is foundational.

And this isn't a China-vs-the-West thing. The idea that people deserve and need to be able to communicate freely predates the current governments of both China and the U.S.

<comment><USER11> It's been known for years that Apple is actively against freedom of speech when it comes to its marketplace. Why would you expect it to make an exception for China ?

<comment><USER12> Freedom of speech only applies to the government. Apple can keep whatever they want out of their store.

<comment><USER13> Why is this downvoted? It's a factual statement. Freedoms of speech (in the U.S.) is that Congress shall make no law..

A radio station that refuses to play my song or let me talk isn't violating my freedom of speech.

Facebook censoring "hate speech" is not violating freedom of speech. Hate speech is protected speech under the U.S. constitution. (Before anyone brings up Schenck v. United States, that case ruled that speech that present imminent danger (yelling fire in a crowded theater) was not protected, but hate speech doesn't generally reach a level of immediate danger.

So if we are to criticize Apple for curating their store, we must criticize Facebook for curating their platform. We must also crisis Google for their curation of advertising content as well. Because unless hate speech says "kill <some group> today at 5pm at the local market," it's broadly protected under the U.S. constitution. What that means that practically every single company in the U.S. is guilty of "violating free speech" – IF they were the government, but they are not and thus aren't violating anyone's right to free speech.

<comment><USER14> Because no one was talking about the United States or the Constitution. Freedom of speech is a broader concept than just what is set out in US law. In fact the conversation was quite specifically not about the US and not about that formulation of freedom of speech.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> My business has an AWS China account and below is the email I received on Friday. It is definitely a crackdown year, on several fronts even other than the internet. Like this year I was forced to pay a $300 fine because I didn't report to the police station within 24-hrs of re-entry while living in my own leased home. Now, my company is not huge but I've employed +100 people and we pay a lot of taxes, social insurance, provide jobs for local families. They do not give a shit about that you will follow the laws of China to do business here or you will be thrown out.

Overall, this year has really chilled my enthusiasm for getting too comfortable with the thought of living here the rest of my working life. In this age with so many elite Chinese being trained and educated abroad, it is really hard to beleive things are going in this directon. I mean, IT Is already hard enough, we need a server in our office that is connected to another server in France, and we need it reliable and without issue. Making this type of stuff even harder on us as a business is really irritating. I really do tell myself every day "if it was easy everybody would be doing it".

"Dear Customer, According to the telecom regulations and the requirement of MIIT/MPS and Internet supervision agency, please check up two parts below. • The illegal "over the wall" proxy sites and provide hosting campaign service for illegal "over the wall" proxy sites. • All main domains which don't have ICP recorded number via MIIT and All websites which have illegal content. We will continuously receive notification from the regulators to close such services or shut down server deployment immediately. In case your will be involved in any consequences of such violation, please stop immediately if you have such illegal services and deployment. Thanks for your understanding and cooperation.

Regards, AWS China (Beijing) Region operated by SINNET"

</comment><comment><USER16> Hey Timmy, what was all that talk about customer security?

[https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/](https://www.apple.com/customer- letter/)

And here I was, almost believing you.

<comment> chroem- This is arguably worse than if they had done nothing at all to supposedly protect user privacy. Now it's clear that Apple was just playing the crowd to win sales.

Why should we even believe that they aren't covertly cooperating with the FBI?

<comment><USER17> That's hardly an Apple-specific issue though. I'd argue we shouldn't trust any corporation -- like Google, Amazon, Facebook as well -- and assume they are in bed with the agencies from the get go.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> You don't need their closed app store. Free workaround:

• apply for a free Apple developer account,

• compile your own copy of [https://github.com/mtigas/OnionBrowser](https://github.com/mtigas/OnionBrowser) or [https://github.com/yuyao110120/ShadowVPN- iOS](https://github.com/yuyao110120/ShadowVPN-iOS) and

• install it on your own iDevice

<comment><USER19> You get 10 days before your app stops working and you have to do it again. It's a real pain in the butt.

<comment><USER20> Where do you get that from? Creating app with your own dev account can run on your device for more than 10 days...

[Update] ok I just checked the limitation of the free dev account, and yes because of certificates it is only valid for 7 days... I was thinking about the regular $$ account.

<comment><USER21> It is idiotic that you can't compile and install something on a device you own.

<comment><USER22> I would pay a large premium for an iPhone that came jailbroken.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> If you build in the ability to censor, you can't disclaim responsibility when a state makes you do it. We'll see the same sort of thing in Russia, the UK, and so on. Apple can still act, if they wish, by not locking down their users. I know that'd be a big step for them.

<comment><USER24> To be clear, "ability to censor" is basically just having an app store. Companies can decide what they'll include in their store, which means governments can also regulate what they're allowed to sell (or block the app store altogether in that country).

That doesn't mean app stores are inherently evil; they still do a lot of good by making sure people can easily find and pay for high-quality apps.

As you say, a reasonable alternative would be to allow side loading of apps, so that people can find and load apps distributed via various peer-to-peer ways, without Apple being responsible.

<comment><USER25> To be clear, what you mean by "having an app store" is "reverting 40 years of established software usage best practice and downgrade to dictatorial way where a central company can control everything".

Words have power. "App store" sounds up-beat, friendly and inclusive. But the rules behind what Apple has established that "App store" actually means are anything but.

<comment><USER24> Apple didn't invent the app store and weren't many mobile phones before the iPhone (running J2ME or whatever) even more restrictive?

Also, Android doesn't restrict side-loading in this way so I disagree that restricting side-loading is an essential feature of an app store as commonly understood.

<comment><USER25> No, phones before the iPhone running J2ME had side-loading. Some carrier turned that off, but if you bought directly from the manufacturers you got a phone that you could control and do anything with by yourself, without any third party stopping you. Manufacturers felt confident that their J2ME sandboxing stopped apps from doing anything evil.

I feel like you didn't really answer my point, though. I criticize you for using an upbeat word to make a dictatorial system sound good. And you counter by talking about something entirely else, word definition and word history.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> What a despicable joke of a country. And shame on Apple for aiding them while they made such a massive deal of user rights in the US.

<comment><USER27> In America, they're still free to openly complain about American policies. Try that in China and you'll be gone before the week is over and a state-sponsored company will take your place

<comment><USER28> Complaining is the opiate of the masses.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> They also require a paid developer subscription to get access to the Network Extensions capability (needed to build a VPN protocol extension) in order to make sure people who develop these apps can't just provide IPA files for normal users in China to "sideload" using tools such as my Cydia Impactor.

<comment><USER30> So they go out of their way to prevent users to avoid censorship by themselves on their devices?

</comment></comment><comment><USER31> This from the company that removed the headphone jack from their phones while crowing about the "courage" involved in making the decision.

I'm not going to pretend to believe that Tim Cook's letter (cited elsewhere) was much more than a PR move in a country they were unlikely to face any substantial consequences for (at least publicly) standing up to the government, or that I really believe that corporations have a responsibility to protect basic human rights (though it would be nice if they did). Still, it'd be nice if corporations didn't try to have it both ways and maintain an image as a courageous force for good when it was convenient while washing their hands of responsibility for any actual action when it became difficult.

<comment><USER32> Aren't they forced to follow Chinese laws when doing business there? Not saying what they did is moral but it seems the moral question here is whether they be doing business in China, not whether they should be following the laws while doing business their because they don't really have a choice once they decide to do business there. Google for example doesn't do business there so they don't have to respect censorship laws.

<comment><USER33> There is no such thing as "once they decide". Once you notice that what you are doing is immoral, you have to revise previous decisions.

Also, it's not that cut and dry: If your product actually contributes to the wealth of the country, they cannot just ban you without hurting themselves. Just because they legally can, does not mean you don't have any leverage.

<comment><USER34> How many of Apple's devices are manufactured in China? The Chinese Government could completely cripple Apple in a second. It really isn't Apple that has the leverage.

Censorship is fundamental to Chinese government policy. It's totally non- negotiable. You either do as they say, or you don't operate in China. No negotiation, no compromise. Given the manufacturing situation China has Apple by the short and curlies, and Cooke knows it.

<comment><USER35> Yet somehow Google manages to make phones and not cooperate with China.

<comment><USER34> Google also doesn't violate Chinese censorship or data disclosure laws, which apparently is what it's being suggested that Apple do.

Of course Google do this by not operating in China at all any more. But what is being suggested is that Apple at least threaten to violate Chinese law or attempt to apply pressure to the Chinese government. Even Google didn't try that when they did operate in China, because frankly they're not insane and they had employees in China, and presumably didn't want any of those employees gracing the hospitality of the Chinese police force.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER36> Why hasn't iMessage been blocked in China? Does apple run a special compromised version of it there, or has China simply not made banning it a priority yet, or is iMessage simply not as secure as we have been told?

<comment><USER37> Most likely Apple cooperates with the respective agencies as requested by Chinese laws. If not yet, they will have to start very soon or iMessage will also be blocked.

Are there any signs of Censorship on iMessage so far? Are terms that are known to be blocked on WeChat, QQ etc (e.g. 法轮功 / Falun Gong) still working on iMessage?

</comment></comment><comment><USER38> That's why corporations will never help against dictatorship. They may do it if it's convenient but in the end they will prioritize money over everything else and fall in line with dictatorships. Happened during the Nazi time, it's happening in China now.

<comment><USER39> > That's why corporations will never help against dictatorship. They may do it > if it's convenient but in the end they will prioritize money over everything > else and fall in line with dictatorships. Happened during the Nazi time, > it's happening in China now.

Well, if you want your government to be powerful enough to enforce laws against corporations, then corporations will not be powerful enough to defy your government.

You can't keep your cake and eat it too.

<comment><USER40> Or perhaps corporations could have a little backbone. Perhaps in their mission statements say that they will prefer to lose profits if it means not trading in a country that performs (x)

Edit: (sametmax) I can't seem to reply - I think the chains too long ? Either way:

Doesn't that mean we should actually be a little upset ? Look I'm no sjw freaking out over everything, nor do I run around scrwing boycot, but perhaps just a little frustration and some constructive argument may lead someone to a better idea of how to handle/fox/or seeup with something.

God's know I don't have an answer, but it does worry me.

<comment><USER41> I wish.

But...

Most people don't have the guts. Why would you expect corporation to have it ? This is the reality of the world, most people don't care about making the moral choice and will choose short term benefits. Getting sick over this is like crying because the sky's color displeases you.

Spend your energy trying to improve things at your level. This is all you can do.

<comment><USER10> Well, our level includes working towards agreement in the HN community that aiding in censorship is bad.

<comment><USER41> Fair enough. But I don't think complaining about it is going to help. Pointing it out yes, but the tone need to be more neutral if you want the crowd from this site to take it seriously.

<comment><USER10> I'm not saying this is the topic to be aggressive in, but neutrality and dispassion aren't always virtues. For example:

"I understand why you think apartheid is best. I just personally wish you would reconsider."

<comment><USER42> Pre-apartheid: SA has working first world infrastructure

Post-apartheid: SA is mired in governmental incompetence and degradation of infrastructure. Not to mention highly elevated levels of murder and rape.

:^)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> Alternative title:

Apple complies with law in countries where it operates.

<comment><USER44> Saying that that it complies with the local laws is a weak argument. This is about moral and ethics.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti- Jewish_legislation_in_pre...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti- Jewish_legislation_in_prewar_Nazi_Germany)

<comment><USER45> The alternative is to stop doing business in China, is that what you want Apple to do?

<comment><USER44> I'm saying that this is a weak argument:

        Apple complies with law in countries where it operates.

Instead one should value the act itself:

        Is it right or wrong to aid in restricting ~1b people's access to knowledge and information
        about their government's past deeds[1], current affairs[2], corruption[3], etc.

I think it's wrong, other may think it's right.

But saying they're following local laws is similar to saying that someone is just respecting German WW2-laws on Jews or apartheid in South Africa.

\---

[1] Tiananmen Square

[2] Food safety ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Chinese_milk_scandal))

[3] High-official corruption ([http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/world/asia/china-blocks- we...](http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/26/world/asia/china-blocks-web-access- to-new-york-times.html))

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER46> The entire Apple platform is designed to restrict the user and prevent anything that Apple doesn't want to happen from happening. This is Apple's decision only and it's in line with all their other decisions that restrict a user's freedom on their closed, non free platform. If people wanted a platform that would run whatever software they wanted without restrictions, they shouldn't have bought Apple period. That's just dumb to expect a closed, non free platform that censors by default to suddenly do a 180 turn and become free. But hey, it's not like people haven't been saying this for decades now is it? Oh right, people like RMS have but most consumers are too stupid to listen. This is the outcome.

</comment><comment><USER47> I see a lot of very cogent arguments defending Apple as only following the law when it comes to VPN laws of China.

I'm not old enough to know this first hand but I believe the anti-apartheid movement against South Africa was started by students and spread to the corporate world before world governments stepped up to ban doing business with South Africa.

This seems to be a specific example of corporate advocacy leading governmental policy.

If the Chinese government's rule over the Chinese people is so egregious to the world, I think Apple would be on solid ground if they refused to do business in China and also refused to do business with Chinese companies outside China.

<comment><USER48> Their shareholders would flip out, no? Even the Chinese people who don't support the govt would lament the loss of using the phone.

<comment><USER49> I doubt this very, very much.

It's a phone, not a body part.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> They probably had to do it to keep the official store available in China, but this is why supporting side-loading of apps like Android does would be a good idea.

</comment><comment><USER10> At what point does Apple itself bear some responsibility for censoring people?

EDIT: Would downvoters please explain their objection to the question? "Apple isn't to blame" and some thoughtful elaboration would be better than just downvoting.

<comment><USER50> You either follow local laws or you leave. How did it work out for Google? Google took a stand and now they're going back.

<comment><USER51> Parent didn't suggest otherwise. Maybe it's better, i.e. the right thing to do, to leave a market in an oppressive land?

Personally I think more of Google for doing that.

<comment><USER52> Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

The USA is hardly a shining example of a country the rest of the world should be following right now. It is doing plenty of oppressive things that many of us in the rest of world don't agree with e.g. Paris accord, incarceration rates, threats against the press.

I don't agree with what China is doing but the "right thing to do" is never so simple.

<comment><USER53> The use of what aboutism and moral highground logical fallacies look extremely crass, especially on HN.

<comment><USER54> Yes, we prefer _do as I say, not as I do_ here. /s

<comment><USER53> No. Whataboutism fallacies were pioneered by the Soviet Union during the Cold War, but when used by someone in the west, they just come off as looking extremely insecure and desperate for a workable argument.

So it is a cultural difference. While whataboutisms and moral high ground fallacies are acceptable in the east, in the west they just signal insecurity and desperation.

<comment><USER54> No. The term whataboutism was used as a way to disregard an argument, without addressing it's point.

It is usable only from the position of arrogance. It has no place in a honest discussion.

<comment><USER53> This was a clear what aboutism that had no argument attached to it. It was the very definition of a what aboutism, not ambiguous in the slightest. The writer even starts out with the proverbial glass house! And then states something about the USA pulling out of the climate accord, which is relevant to censorship? Even as whataboutisms go, this one is not even on topic.

They could have replaced that whole paragraph by "what aboutism america!" And no information would have been lost.

Seriously, what aboutisms have no place in serious discussions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> Isn't it wonderful that the iPhone is a walled garden, and with the flick of a switch, an entire category of software cannot be ran on it?

The fact that this switch exists is the real tragedy here - not the fact that Apple chose to use it.

</comment><comment><USER56> Tech companies must play a long political game and spend their vast fortunes to lobby, to own media and influence policy and control the message.

Once they do this the will no longer be in conflict with governments and their policy.

Take note in coming years as the tech barons buy up media to control the message.

They will of course do this and then the real problem will not be uppity governments but mega tech corporations who semi covertly run the world.

</comment><comment><USER57> I love this summary from n-gate.com about this thread

"Apple complies with the law. Hackernews experiences cognitive dissonance at the thought that there might be an organization capable of telling Apple what to do. Many thought experiments are performed to try to imagine a world where a corporation might give a shit about human rights. China's secret police show up incognito to explain that anyone who disapproves of Chinese law is probably a Nazi. The rest of the thread is fanfiction about Tim Cook personally exorcising the evil from Beijing."

</comment><comment><USER29> They also require a paid developer subscription to get access to the Network Extensions capability (needed to build a VPN protocol extension) in order to make sure people who develop these apps can't just provide IPA files for normal users in China to "sideload" using tools such as my Cydia Impactor.

</comment><comment><USER58> Profits before people, the Apple motto.

</comment><comment><USER59> To all in HN:

It is a huge market which helping the people in China break the GFW (Great Fire Wall). You can start a startup for that :)

</comment><comment><USER60> This is awful, but in England and America, I foresee similar policies will come - in the name of law, safety, and security.

<comment><USER53> Neither America nor the U.K. have national firewalls in place.

<comment><USER61> Yet. Theresa May would build one right away if she could (and the first steps are being taken)

<comment><USER53> If she could. But they would need to build those first before considering the next step of blocking VPNs. See austrailia at risk also. I doubt it would ever happen in America, however.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> But with Windows/Linux its still possible to install apps on you own, unlike the locked down app store.

</comment><comment><USER63> It's not very surprising considering that it's the local law and everyone will have to follow it or get out...

It isn't going to actually prevent anyone from tunneling past the great firewall of course, so it's more like a gesture than an actual effective decision from the government.

</comment><comment><USER64> So much for 'Think Different', huh?

[https://thisisnotadvertising.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/nel...](https://thisisnotadvertising.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/nelsonmandela.jpg)

</comment><comment><USER65> Doesn't iPhone supports native VPN in Settings ? How are they going to prevent users from using that ? I mean it's not as easy as downloading a dedicated app and logging in but using the Settings app is not much of a work.

</comment><comment><USER66> Couldn't you just do this in China? [https://www.imore.com/how-configure-vpn- access-your-iphone-o...](https://www.imore.com/how-configure-vpn-access-your- iphone-or-ipad)

<comment><USER37> The problem is that none of the default protocols work in China. Either they are blocked via DPI in combination with techniques like TCP RST injection / null-routing of the destination IPs, or they are known to be insecure, like PPTP (which is why it is removed in iOS 10)

<comment><USER66> I was able to use gmail, skype, etc with some pretty basic vpn knowledge in China.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> I always wonder about Hong Kong now that it is under the one country two systems - basically, I wonder if internet censorship will be lessened before HK internet openness disappears.

</comment><comment><USER68> Apple is free to do what it wants, I'm free not to buy their stuff.

<comment><USER56> If you're going to take an "I'll not support Apple cause it complies with Chinese law" position, the ill respect your stance if you stop consuming all Chinese made products. Unless of course you're position is a deeply selective one.

</comment></comment><comment><USER69> I assume they are still allowing manual VPN configurations right? They are only removing apps that configure it automatically for you. Not downplaying the impact of this, just clarifying.

<comment><USER70> No, there are other apps that implemented other types of VPN using [https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension](https://developer.apple.com/documentation/networkextension)

There are many VPN apps that based on ShadowSocks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> Terrible news.

So lets start tackling the problem and figuring out ways to help the averave Chinese person evade censorhip without developer accounts and the knowledge to compile...

</comment><comment><USER72> Apple tailors to countries. They made an iOS without facetime for Dubai specifically.

It's a good thing, however, that they are fighting for privacy where they can.

</comment><comment><USER73> [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtvjbmoDx-I)

</comment><comment><USER74> Stallman was right.

</comment><comment><USER75> Perhaps some free-speech provision should be part of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights

<comment> k-mcgrady Article 19 protects free expression.

<comment><USER75> so they just blithely ignore that, got it

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER76> Russia is next. They just have passed a law to ban VPNs and anonymous proxies.

</comment><comment><USER77> I wonder what Orwell would have thought of modern China.

</comment><comment><USER78> Seems that Apple is just following, with much delay, the law of People's Republic of China. I don't understand why some people think companies should be above the law.

<comment><USER10> > I don't understand why some people think companies should be above the law.

I think certain aspects of justice are above legal frameworks. For instance, slavery is wrong no matter what the law says. Companies like Apple, by lobbying the government for various non-business things (gay rights, climate change, etc.), recognize this.

I think wholesale restriction and manipulation of political speech is just wrong even if it is legally mandatory. And, while understandable, I'm not sure (still chewing it over) it's a valid excuse to say that we were just complying with the law.

<comment><USER79> > For instance, slavery is wrong no matter what the law says.

I hope you realize that you are only saying this because you happen to be born at this particular point in human civilization.

For a very long time, people thought slavery is right, including the people who wrote your constitution (assuming your are from US). It is easy to say that slavery is wrong now, but not in 18th century in the US. Think of China as the US, a few centuries ago, when human rights are still a concept being explored.

<comment><USER10> > I hope you realize that you are only saying this because you happen to be > born at this particular point in human civilization.

And you're only saying _that_ because you were born when and where you were. It's not universally accepted that ethics are relative like that.

Otherwise I'm not sure what you're saying. That slavery was relatively OK in the 18th century so Apple enforcing government censorship is now, too?

It's also worth pointing out that colonial contemporaries were appalled by slavery, though they didn't have the power to universally outlaw it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Hey Timmy, what was all that talk about customer security?

[https://www.apple.com/customer-letter/](https://www.apple.com/customer- letter/)

And here I was, almost believing you.

You're a coward.

<comment><USER80> > _You 're a coward._

While you're calling another man a coward for not living your values, I'm wondering what you've done to stand up against China that's so fucking brave.

<comment><USER81> > for not living your values

He is pointing out that they are supposedly cook's own values.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> What would Steve Jobs do?

<comment><USER56> The same. Disobey the government in china, stop making money.

</comment></comment><comment><USER83> This is horrible, but in England and America, I'm 100% certain that similar policies will be applied - in the name of law, and public security.

<comment><USER79> [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14880796](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14880796)

Deja vu?

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> I find all this outrage about Apple not taking a stand highly amusing.

Practically every single product used in the western world is made in China. Please report back if you can get rid of all those products at a _personal_ level. For a start, looks like I have throw this laptop away. Not going to happen.

<comment><USER85> The mere use of Chinese products is not the problem being discussed.

</comment></comment><comment><USER39> Next China will outlaw Linux for having an IPSec implementation in it, lol. What a sad country that believes liberty comes after wealth, and in relative terms may never have either.

<comment> dis-sys GFW managed to screw IPSec ages ago. It is also worth pointing out that the GFW itself is built on top of Linux systems.</comment></comment>


OpenBSD on the Huawei MateBook X - <AUTHOR> https://jcs.org/2017/07/14/matebook <comment><USER3> A few years ago I bought a top spec MacBook Pro 15" as my main workhorse. I did it somewhat for the OS because there was a small handful of applications I needed that only ran on OS X or Windows and between the two the choice was clear. But the main reason for it was that the build quality of the laptop case, the screen, and the keyboard were superior to anything money could buy. I am still very happy with it, but I am just so happy to see that build quality is starting to become a thing manufacturs and consumers are starting to pay attention to and not the specs. I don't really care if I have an i5 or an i7. Both are damn fast and if I need more power I will rent it from AWS et al. But I can't rent a better screen hinge. Or a higher res display. Just look at this laptop in TFA. Five years ago you couldn't find a thing like that. X1 Carbon was just popping up and having a decent display was basically impossible. And don't get me started on the touch pads the size of my thumbnail. Competition is truly good for the consumer!

<comment><USER4> What exactly do you mean by "build quality"? An aluminium case? Sure it gives a premium feel, but it's also heavy, dents and attenuates radio, so not really an obvious choice before Apple popularised it. Recently Apple have also standardised on glued-in batteries, which is not really representative of a premium "build quality" IMHO. Their trackpads have been very good, but I've always preferred the ThinkPad nipple.

> _the screen, and the keyboard were superior to anything money could buy_

You are showing your bias here. Thinkpad keyboards have always been more highly regarded than Apples. And not everyone wants a glossy glass-covered panel, even if it's a good one (i.e. not the MacBook Air).

<comment><USER5> I have both a MacBook Pro 2015ish and a Thinkpad T430 2016 issued through work and I would be hard pressed to choose which one I prefer. They're both well build and both keyboards are nice. Oddly I find the MacBook much more comfortable to use on my lap but prefer the Thinkpad on a desk. I have not found glare to be an issue and prefer the glass screen of the MacBook to the matte screen of the Thinkpad primarily because it's next to impossible to remove finger prints from the matte screen. I hate hate hate the sharp edge of the MacBook which digs into my wrists. I like the battery bump on the Thinkpad because it gives me a grip to carry it. I baby the MacBook because I know it will be a chore to repair or replace where as the Thinkpad is just a 15 min HDD swap so it receives a lot of abuse.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> I'm just happy to see new devices being made with high resolution 3:2 screens.

<comment><USER7> This. So much this. It boggles my mind that basically 100% of PC business laptops are stuck with productivity-averse 16:9 displays.

Corporations are willingly paying the 'enterprise' markup for business laptops, manufacturers should have at least the decency to come up with proper screens. But no. For almost all hardware-related design improvements, they will make a move only after Apple has kicked their asses and humiliated them and their derivative design...

<comment><USER8> I prefer my 21:9 on desktop, I feel like you'd be stuck with one window on 4:3, but with 16:9 you can make one full window and one smaller one and two full windows on 21:9. 16:9 seems more productive to _me_.

<comment><USER7> Desktops do not have the same constraints: you can choose the size (in a much more significant way than with laptops), orientation, and number of displays. I'm happy with my desktop 16:9 display, but mostly because it's a Gigantor Five-Thousand model whose span is taller/wider than my eyes can roll, making the actual aspect ratio kind of irrelevant.

On a laptop space is at a premium, and the ever-narrower displays have in practice been made even worse by modern UI, like the larger Windows taskbar, or that damn ribbon thing in productivity/office suites. On a laptop I often feel like I must scroll every three lines. A (IMO) saner 1.6 or 1.5 ratio would still allow for split screen will giving a better vertical real estate.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> While it obviously does run, it's still so broken it's hardly usable. You basically have a 'mobile PC' rather than a laptop/notebook. There is no suspend/resume, hibernation is slow, video not really supported and the touchpad doesn't fully work. Basically, it's fine for when you want a 'mobile server', but for desktop or human interaction via the local console this is just as bad as a cheap windows laptop: things are there, but they don't really work well.

<comment><USER10> Things like suspend/resume, hibernate, video drivers, and touchpads generally get fixed when developers have a need for them. You can hack it together yourself, or you can buy a developer the same model laptop that you wish had everything working and hope they like it enough to fix stuff. Or you can shut up.

And fwiw, cheap windows laptops "just work" far more often and far better than almost any linux distro I've tried.

Edit: Author notes he is working on improving touchpad. This is exactly how it gets done for OpenBSD.

<comment><USER11> Or one can continue pointing out the deficiencies in the software as it relates to a consumer-ready laptop WITHOUT doing anything you mentioned, which is almost as impolite as you telling people to shut up when they notice an imperfection in the OS.

<comment><USER10> It's free software. Does OpenBSD owe you a perfect OS?

<comment><USER12> No, but if you want people to switch to it, then ignoring complaints is the first way for people to just boycott using your OS. I also work as a free software developer, and I don't understand why you would act that way when someone tells you they don't like the state of your project.

Responding to a reasonable complaint with "as developers we only scratch our own itch and we don't owe you a 'perfect OS'" is just hostile for no reason.

Also, nobody said they expect a perfect OS, but I also wouldn't call this a laptop install if everything that GP said didn't work was correct.

<comment><USER13> I stand to be corrected, but I don't think most OpenBSD devs care too much about getting others to switch to it.

They build the OS that they want, and make it available for anyone else to use.

There are some evangelists, to be sure. I just don't think it's a primary concern to many of the devs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> Is anyone else concerned about buying a laptop from a Chinese manufacturer?

I own a number of MacBooks and while they were all assembled in China I don't have any concerns about the firmware. As more of these make it to US markets I'm sure if there is something it will come out but I'm currently taking a wait and see approach.

<comment><USER15> What are you concerned about exactly?

<comment><USER16> I imagine compromised security due to government meddling. Huawei's ownership structure is complicated and government influence is a concern. See Australia's decision to ban Huawei from it's National Broadband Network tender:

[http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-29/government- maintains-n...](http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-29/government-maintains- nbn-ban-on-chinese-telco-huawei-after-secu/5051622)

I have yet to hear of any proof that Huawei has actually compromised any of it's products or work.

<comment><USER12> As an Australian, I'm not sure that I would recommend listening to any advice from us in relation to the NBN. Also from my experience working with them in upstream projects like runc, Huawei has a lot of very interesting technology in their offerings.

Also note that basically every modern piece of technology is assembled and has its firmware flashed in China (or other various Asiatic nations with questionable governments).

<comment><USER17> I'll second this. The NBN is more politics than technology these days - <USER2> the politics have meant they've chosen yesterday's technology. I wouldn't use them to back an argument for technical sanity.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> I really need to take Huawei more seriously, as they apparently offer me more control over what i supposedly own than most.

</comment><comment><USER19> What would be the draw of OpenBSD on a consumer laptop over, say, FreeBSD, or even Linux?

<comment><USER20> The "consumer" you're talking about is a very technical user for starters. Something doesn't have to carry all the traits of "consumer" software for it to be useful to someone.

I used openbsd on a laptop some years back until that hardware died and my replacement didn't have some driver I wanted. It was a joy to use if you appreciate a light, no-nonsense Unix. Only pain point is that upgrades are very manual.

Now a decade later I have a different machine running freebsd which has a pretty similar feel, and I do appreciate the easier upgrades. I thought for a while in the recent past obsd had more up to date Intel graphics drivers but that was remedied in my use case by freebsd 11.

As for "why not linux", I feel like the BSDs as a desktop have a lot of the "on your own" feel that linux used to in the late 90s. Some people I suspect will loathe this. I like it.

<comment><USER21> > As for "why not linux", I feel like the BSDs as a desktop have a lot of the > "on your own" feel that linux used to in the late 90s. Some people I suspect > will loathe this. I like it.

Ditto that. Especially post- (dare I say it) systemd, Linux distros seem intent on going the commercial model of dictating how the "experience" should work, and I find I don't live in any of their target niches. Fedora is probably the closest, but is way too RHEL, and I kinda hate the way they do a lot of things.

The BSDs are by and for unix folks. If you're (for want of a better phrase) "culturally unix", they're a better fit.

<comment><USER22> and no SystemD. I like that part. :-P

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> This hardware looks to be a pretty good value. I was looking to get an X1 Carbon but this has piqued my interest.

</comment><comment><USER24> I love the design of this site. I'm not sure I've seen anything like it.</comment>


FF Meta Web Pro - <AUTHOR> http://typekit.com/fonts/ff-meta-web-pro <comment><USER2> You've linked to a typeface with no additional description.</comment>


Running a Wall of Sheep in the Wild - <AUTHOR> https://blog.rootshell.be/2018/10/26/post-brucon-experience-running-a-wall-of-sheep-in-the-wild/ <comment><USER2> > Even if the biggest part of our attendees are men, we like to welcome women > and encourage them to join security conferences. That's why the goal of the > network team is to not hurt them by fighting against p0rn on the WoS!

Maybe I'm a minority, but as a cis man I'd find a big public wall of porn in a conference disgusting. I'm definitely not against porn, but there's a time and place for everything.

<comment><USER3> Agree on this. It was… weird to see someone making a correlation between "not enjoying porn on display during a security conference" and the gender of the person. It's good that they're filtering it, it's bad that they need to, it's sad that they consider it a gender issue.

<comment><USER4> It does intuitively seem like one gender would be far more likely to raise issue with it, and I'm pretty sure most would agree with this perception outside of trying to intentionally frame issues in gender neutral ways, which isn't necessary to conclude the content may not be appropriate regardless.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm not sure why they're still doing the WoS. The goal to raise security awareness among attendees seems to have been achieved or obviated. Now it just seems like a game where people try to put funny, pornographic, or commercial images up. Expenses are up, benefits are down, where's the end point? I even think a case could be made that they're encouraging the display of porn by turning it into this sort of cat-and-mouse game.

<comment><USER6> Honestly the Open-NSFW filter did a really good job of catching the overwhelming majority of the issues. Also until LetsEncrypt became commonplace, Dofler was still discovering tons of applications that forwent even basic encryption. It was quite terrifying.

This year was the last year I ran Dofler through its normal con-circuit, mostly due to the amount of encryption thats happening, I'd have to pivot away to completely different types of metadata that would be computationally expensive to pull, or would require a LOT of coding time, or would require dependence on commercial tools. it was simply time to lay it to rest.

</comment></comment><comment><USER7> _we added a "skin colour filter"._

What colour skin?

<comment><USER8> Most writeups/HowTos for this problem cover all human skin colours with reasonable degrees of success (given how niave th algorithm is).

The article specifically mentions Hulk and Smurf porn easily defeating the filter.

<comment><USER9> Depending how they sample it perhaps half-toning would defeat it too?

<comment><USER6> flesh-tone filtering algorithms sucked.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> To save you time, because they don't mention it until they show you the logs later:

The main tech here - that reassembles images from HTTP - is 'driftnet'.

Apt get or yum install it or pacman etc on any Linux distro.

<comment><USER6> Actually, it Dofler uses driftnet, ettercap, dsniff, tshark, ngrep, and PVS and wired them together into a web front-end. Driftnet was the component that made porn filtering very hard, as driftnet gives you no indication of WHERE the image came from, just that it found something.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> "skin colour filter"?

I still remember the day I found a colouring-in puzzle in a book with one of the colours labeled "flesh" and asking my Dad which crayon to use. None of them were the colour of my skin. Eye-opening day.

I suppose the good news is that I could use my porno selfies (if I had any) to DOS the display.

<comment><USER9> What did not having a crayon in a particular colour teach you?

Your best options for standard crayon sets are probably pale-skinned and sunburnt (bright pink) or somewhere around chocolate brown.

Most sets have pink, white, black, brown, and yellow so most people should be able to do a close average tone to their facial colour?

<comment><USER11> This was a colouring-in by numbers book so they had a particular one in mind.

<comment><USER9> I don't get it, you had a colouring by numbers book with your own picture in? Sorry, I'm missing something, ELI5?</comment></comment></comment></comment>


When Microsoft's eBook store closes, your books disappear too - <AUTHOR> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47810367 <comment><USER3> I don't buy ebooks, and this is just one reason. This is the complete list:

1\. For some reason they cost a similar amount to print books

Sometimes a bit less, sometimes the same, sometimes more. Distributing a physical book means you have to print, handle, store, transport, store again, handle again and transport again (using a simplified model of the journey a book takes to the end user). That costs money, and it costs effectively $0 to get an ebook to a user. I don't see that saving being passed on to me, the consumer.

Not only that, you're generally paying for _less_ than you get with a physical book in terms of rights and (IMO convenience)

2\. You can't (or maybe you can) lend them freely.

Last I checked there were limits on lending with the kindle/amazon. Maybe that's changed, but I don't want to have to think about that, I just want to lend the book to someone.

3\. You can't give them to someone.

Maybe this has changed since I last looked, but passing on the book to someone else and it now being "theirs" isn't possible. Again perhaps that's changed these days.

3\. Cognitive overhead

Can I do this stuff? Can't I? How do I do it? I don't want to have to think about that. Last week I gave a book to my daughter by just putting it on her desk. It was easy.

4\. Longevity

In 10 years will I still be able to access my books? 20? Yes, because they're over there, on a shelf.

If ebooks cost a fraction of what they cost today then I would totally consider them. It's a tradeoff. Right now ebooks don't swing the balance towards them.

<comment><USER4> All your points are dead on. I'll throw in these cons as well:

5\. visibility (as noted by angrygoat) and browseability is terrible.

6\. Flipping through an ebook looking for something is impossible.

7\. Illustrations or drawings are rendered terribly.

The list of pros of ebooks:

1\. It's just a better experience. Ebooks are lighter than their equivalent books, easy to use one-handed, fonts can be adjusted, you can carry as many as you want with no extra weight, you can search within a book, you have access with wifi to your entire library at any point in time without having to fill up a cramped apartment. Browsing for books to read is terrible, but I can browse at my local B&N and then buy the ebooks on Amazon (which makes me terrible, but what can you do).

In balance, this means that I've switched almost entirely to ebooks.

The objections that you give (1-4) are the ones that are fixable by hoisting the Jolly Roger. This a step I am reluctant to take but if point 1 keeps going in this direction, then I can't really convince myself that I can justify the cost. A literally out-of-print book [1] selling for $13 is so outlandish that it makes my head spin. A book where the e-book is twice as expensive as the paperback [2]? What on earth is going on here.

[1] [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B009FKTTMQ](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B009FKTTMQ)

[2] [https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003XT605Y](https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003XT605Y)

<comment><USER3> > It's just a better experience.

That's rather subjective which is why I left most of this stuff out. Some people really like reading on a kindle or iPad, I don't particularly (the Kindle is "OK").

> Ebooks are lighter than their equivalent books

It depends on the book TBH. A lot will be heavier, many won't. The book I'm currently reading ("Medium Raw" by Anthony Bourdain) is 49g heavier than a kindle (the cheapest in the UK), which for me is effectively the same as 0g in terms of wether I will notice.

I am a relatively strong man, throwing a book or two into my bag doesn't make a difference to me.

Of course, if I were to carry my entire library around that would be a _significantly_ different story :) But then I just pick books I want to read and take them, and if I change my mind later I do something else.

> easy to use one-handed

Never had a problem with this.

> fonts can be adjusted

Never wanted to do this.

> you can search within a book

I rarely want to do this, so it's not a particularly big deal when I can't.

> you have access with wifi to your entire library at any point in time > without having to fill up a cramped apartment

I mentioned in another comment, I am lucky in that I don't have that issue where I live. The balance might be altered if I lived in a small Tokyo apartment (for instance) however.

> The objections that you give (1-4) are the ones that are fixable by hoisting > the Jolly Roger.

I can buy ebooks and strip the DRM if I want, I tried it (on ebooks I legitimately bought) so I could make sure I always had the book. It was a PITA and didn't (for me) swing the pendulum enough to choose ebooks.

<comment><USER4> For better experience I don't know if I can convince you -- the Kindle Oasis is just ridiculously ergonomic. I'm a voracious reader. Reading a paperback without breaking the spine is an annoyance that I'm glad to have put behind me. Reading a full-size hardcover is just not doable one-handed or lying on your side in bed. The front light is easy on the eyes at night and doesn't disturb other sleepers in your bed. I've tried to go back especially to re- read treasured classics, like Hitchiker's Guide, and just went ahead and bought the e-book version.

> I am a relatively strong man, throwing a book or two into my bag doesn't > make a difference to me.

I've put a lot of work and streamlining into not carrying a bag at all. Carrying my kindle in my back pocket or jacket pocket is easy enough. Similarly carrying a book depends on the book.

> > easy to use one-handed

> Never had a problem with this.

How do you turn pages? I used to have to do the awkward reverse flip - <USER2> close - move finger - let hang - flip up, or just free up my other hand for a second. On a crowded train neither of these work particularly well.

<comment><USER3> I'll bear the Oasis in mind if I see it.

> I've put a lot of work and streamlining into not carrying a bag at all.

I mostly have to carry a laptop so getting rid of my bag isn't an option. When I do leave my bag at home I might put a slim book into my pocket (I've got "The old man and the sea" to read at some point) or I'll read the news on my phone, listen to music, or just sit and think.

I did streamline my wallet though. Thin nylon all-ett wallet, one card, some cash.

> How do you turn pages?

I mostly free my other hand (it's rare I'm doing something particularly involved with my "spare" hand while reading). This is mostly in the form of "put down my up of tea for a moment". If I'm in the kitchen I might put the book down on it's back and use the reading hand to turn the page while also holding it open.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I didn't start buying ebooks from Amazon/Kindle until I realized it was relatively easy to break its DRM. I've never used the files anywhere else but I keep a cracked copy of every purchase just in case. That old story about "1984" being removed gave me too much of a negative impression.

<comment><USER6> So they still get your money and you deal with the inconvenience?

Try buying from [https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebooks](https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebooks) where possible (DRM-free).

<comment><USER7> There's actually quite a few eBook stores out there with DRM-free options, you just have to know where to look, and they're usually publisher-specific.

Humble Bundle does a weekly Book Bundle. Wiley, O'Reilly, No Starch, and several other publishers all regularly participate with tech books, geek books, comic books, and manga.

No Starch itself deserves a separate mention just because they're awesome. On their own site, if you buy the print book, the eBook comes free, a nice courtesy you won't pick up buying on Amazon. And of course, all of their stuff is DRM-free.

Informit, which is Pearson's programming and IT book site, sells watermarked, but otherwise DRM-free content (if you really care, watermark stripping likely isn't that hard, but as long as they're not trying to tamper with my ability to open the file where I want to, I don't mind watermarks, I ain't a pirate). Informit includes Adobe Press, Cisco Press, Microsoft Press, VMware Press, Sams, etc. I've gotten a lot of textbooks from here.

Manning Publications sells DRM-free too.

If you're a Trekkie, Simon & Schuster sells Star Trek novels DRM-free on their site as well. They have monthly sales that bring a set of them down to 99 cents a piece, which is good, since their standard prices are obscene.

Even Comixology (from Amazon, of course), has joined the DRM-free game, though only for specific publishers. Neither Marvel nor DC participate, mind you, but many of the smaller publishers do.

<comment><USER8> Didn't O'Reilly stop selling ebooks and now only sell paper books and online (Safari)?

<comment><USER9> They stopped selling ebooks directly to consumers. They still publish them, but now sales are all through third parties. You can get them in PDF or ePub format, DRM-free, from ebooks.com.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> That's why I love the way we get ebooks in Poland. When we buy an ebook, we usually get a pack of files (epub/pdf/mobi), without any DRM, but with watermarks, some visible, some hidden. Same for audiobooks. There's no DRM, there's some piracy, as always, but the system works and it works pretty damn well. I wish american ebook and audiobook stores were like this.

<comment><USER11> Why should your ebook files be watermarked? Your printed books aren't. Watermarks are ugly.

<comment><USER12> I'm fine with watermarks. The only downside to them is that they are traceable to the original buyer if someone else gets their hands on your and decides to distribute it online, so lending them to a friend is risky.

But the watermarks really only matter when they get illegally copied around, and don't hurt the owner in the way more restrictive forms of DRM do.

<comment><USER13> Risky how? Is there some punishment for not perfectly securing bytes? That would be insane because companies aren't punished for sharing your stuff by accident or even selling it on purpose.

<comment><USER12> Maybe they should be.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> The Right to Read becomes more relevant every year... [https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to- read.en.html](https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.en.html)

</comment><comment><USER15> > _But with the 5G boom about to hit, experts will tell you we're set to see a > massive increase in connected devices and appliances, many of which we'll > probably only be able to licence, rather than own._

Why is this more likely with 5G than 4G? What appliances are not suitable for IOT right now, but will be with 5G? Would most of my appliances be in my home, where I have wifi?

<comment><USER16> This is the usual marketing nonsense. But unless mobile carriers start offering very cheap plans for IOT devices (which is in itself unlikely), I don't see this happening any time soon. WiFi is pretty much here to stay, and is much more reliable indoors than 4/5/6/7/..G

<comment><USER17> > But unless mobile carriers start offering very cheap plans for IOT devices > (which is in itself unlikely)

I would have thought there was something equivalent of the electricity duck curve for *G and they've got plenty of bandwidth to sell at certain times of day.

<comment><USER16> For me it's not a matter of bandwidth, just the cost of the number of SIMs needed. I have hundreds of devices in the field, many in locations with no wifi or wired internet available. They all have sim slots, but the cost (in Belgium) makes it an impossible venture.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This is the second time I've lost eBooks to Microsoft. The first time was some time in the late 90s, when I used to read books on the bus on my Compaq iPAQ PocketPC PDA, using an app which I think was called Microsoft Reader? The books were of course DRM'd.

Eventually the app disappeared and those files are now useless.

<comment><USER7> Yeah, I bought a few LIT format eBooks off of Amazon back in the day (predating Kindle, I believe). I think I might still have them somewhere with the DRM broken, but obviously, newer formats are nicer.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> Check out this list of DRM-free bookstores, maintained by Libreture [1].

I usully buy my DRM-free ebooks from Weightless Books [2], and also subscribe to "The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction" and "Interzone" from that site.

[1] [https://www.libreture.com/bookshops/](https://www.libreture.com/bookshops/)

[2] [https://weightlessbooks.com/](https://weightlessbooks.com/)

<comment><USER20> Thanks!

</comment></comment><comment><USER21> I pay for my content but I also pirate copies of everything I like. Every DVD, ebook, audible audiobook, favored Netflix series, and graphic novel has a version in my personal archive. Hell, I even keep offline copies of my favorite YouTube videos and site mirrors of my favorite webcomics. Go down the list of your "liked" YouTube videos and take note of how many of them are now lost to you, through account terminations or being marked private. If you don't take control of the things that're important to you, you leave the door open for someone to take them away.

</comment><comment><USER22> I didn't even know Microsoft _had_ an eBook store. Somebody in marketing needs to get laid off.

<comment><USER23> and replaced by many more people in order to have the resources to market their next product

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> Well, that's one argument for piracy. Or at least avoiding anything that you can't have DRM-free.

(I still like my Steam library, but the games I really care about are bought on GOG/HIB when possible.)

<comment><USER25> Sorry for the question, but what does HIB means?

<comment><USER26> I assume "humble indie bundle".

<comment><USER27> aren't those still mainly activated on steam?

<comment><USER28> Every game in a Humble _Indie_ Bundle has always been available DRM free. Titles in their "Humble Trove" (a monthly subscriber perk) are also DRM free. Other bundles Humble Bundle sells are often Steam only.

<comment><USER29> I find it slightly sad that Humble Bundle watered down their brand by allowing Steam-only sales in the (Not So) Humble Store, then further by increasingly having Steam-only bundles.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER30> Well, I couldn't download half of the albums I bought 5-6 years ago in iTunes because they're no longer available in my country and there is no way to re- download them. An this store is far from being closed...

</comment><comment><USER31> Same here. Every amazon book I've read has been on my kindle, after I've unnecessarily stripped the DRM. Just so I know that the process of removing the DRM was successful.

The instant I no longer can is the same day I'll stop buying DRMed books.

</comment><comment><USER32> I like ebooks.

I like being able to resize fonts, I like looking up words immediately, I like carrying around dozens on a phone and/or kindle.

I like the sales. I follow reddit's fantasy and printsf subreddits, and there isn't a week that goes by without a book on sale for $1.99. Pricing could be more advantageous (lower for ebooks) but at the same time, I just bought a few of Greg Egan's books to fill out my collection (Diaspora and Quarantine) and they are _right now_ on the US Store at least, $2.99 ebook versus $12.99 paperback. And, the ebook versions are loanable.

Yeah I could use my library more, and I use it plenty, but it turns out I _LIKE AND WANT TO_ funnel cash towards authors I enjoy. That's how they make their living.

Physical books still offer better random access to content (flipping around from chapter to chapter) but ebooks won me over for technical books as well - simply because I can have them in multiple places (home, work, travel) without lugging them around. Yes I have a physical copies of certain key books but the convenience of having them all over wins out, for me.

</comment><comment><USER33> This article is pretty ironic given this is exactly what the BBC did when they shut down BBC Store.

</comment><comment><USER34> Support your local library!

Many libraries have tons of Ebooks to lend out. It's more convenient than going to the library (since it's all online), but otherwise the same deal. Check out, read it, and return it.

(1 crappy thing is that the library can only lend each copy a set number of times before it is 'destroyed', but I guess that's intended to match how physical books would fall apart. It's not ideal, but still - SUPPORT YOUR LOCAL LIBRARY!!)

</comment><comment><USER35> Won't the books remain on the reader device, even if the store closes?

The discussion is also old. I realized that I end up lending only a small fraction of books to other people, and my kids will probably not care about most of my books. Storage of paper books also costs money, so rebuying the few books I want to pass on or reread may be cheaper than buying and keeping physical copies of books. So I chose ebooks.

<comment><USER36> I assume books are encrypted on the ebook reader and the reader operates by going to Microsoft each time someone tries to open a book and getting an encryption key show the book unencrypted.

<comment><USER35> That's not how it usually works, does it with Microsoft? It would be very limiting and annoying to be unable to read books without internet access (say on the beach on holidays, for example). Certainly not the case on Kindle.

There were cases were people's Amazon accounts were cancelled, so they couldn't buy new books from Amazon. The books they already bought remained on their kindles, though.

There were also cases of Amazon deleting books from kindles, when the books became illegal.

Any reason to assume Microsoft operated in a very different way?

<comment><USER37> Presumably the tech is different, but Zune DRM for music bought before 2012 would've stopped working in 2017. The service itself closed down in 2015. So maybe they have a model where the license is valid for e.g. 5 years, and at that point in time the devices would've been clever enough to download new licenses.

Has anyone made "ZuneBook" puns yet?

Edit: hah Zunebook was an MS tablet that was supposed to compete with Amazon Kindle tablets...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> I seriously worry about this with Kindle books I get on Amazon. I hope Amazon never goes away, though I guess it could at any time.

<comment><USER39> Like another commenter has said, the DRM on Kindle e-books is pretty easy to break. [https://apprenticealf.wordpress.com](https://apprenticealf.wordpress.com)

<comment><USER40> Isn't it technically a crime though? That's the kicker: the legislative backing to the schemes. Its a matter of time until this GS are so locked down that circumvention becomes impractical, even if its several years in the future. The 'it doesn't work' argument is temporary unless there is enough pushback (as happened with music, thankfully)

<comment><USER41> DRM is technically a crime, too. It's infringing upon First Sale Doctrine. You, as someone buying media, actually have rights to what you purchase. The general public has just accepted the industry trampling on those rights and lobbying for laws that conflict with them.

<comment><USER42> If my understanding is correct, the Doctrine of First Sale only applies if you buy a physical asset, like a CD or an actual book.

<comment><USER43> Is DeCSS not illegal under the DMCA? Those DRM'd DVDs were no less physical than DRM-less audio CDs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER44> After PlaysForSure and Zune this is the third time MS shafts buyers of DRM'd content.

<comment><USER45> I was just thinking that it was supremely ironic that the creators of the PlaysForSure brand are serial deprecators of DRM systems.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> I like to write using the Leanpub.com platform because book purchasers get PDF/Kindle/ePub formats. I also like to use other publishers who provide DRM free files, I don't mind watermarks. (I also sell using a Creative Commons share for no commercial gain license so people who buy my books can give away copies to their friends.)

That said, Kindle books are very convenient and I like the ability to hilite text and add notes.

In any case, as long as Microsoft refunds their eBooks purchase price to customers, I don't see their decision to get out of the business as a bad thing. Actually it seems like a classy move on their part making refunds.

</comment><comment><USER47> For anyone in Sweden there is a nice e-bookstore called Bokon. It has DRM free books that can easily be synced to a Kindle or some other device.

[https://bokon.se/](https://bokon.se/)

</comment><comment><USER48> The whole point of the cloud is so you don't own anything anymore and so that companies can entangle you in a recurring revenue stream.

</comment><comment><USER49> A thing I don't get about eBook sites is why they aren't easier to browse. Simply being able to scroll through a screen equivalent of a library shelf (Dewey Decimal or LOC system) would be nice.

Obviously, using libgen tends to avoid this DRM problem.

No doubt as the surveillance economy ramps up, getting every last penny for copyright will ramp up also.

</comment><comment><USER50> Another curious situation drm-demanding publishers have created for themselves is the lack of control and leverage against the stores. With the closed Kindle ecosystem in such a major position, Amazon (with its poor drm) has tremendous leverage over the publishers.

</comment><comment><USER51> Slight tangent.. where is the promise of books being printed on demand locally?

</comment><comment><USER52> I REALLY don't agree with giving Amazon money (ethically) but I am a hypocrite and end up buying a lot of ebooks and audiobooks from them, I do my best to back up the files using calibre but I'm sure they could lock down devices / files using DRM and their latest DRM incarnation is very hard to remove. I try to buy DRM-free ebooks and audiobooks whenever possible but I think mostly due to market domination authors and publishers end up at least mostly exclusively providing content via Amazon.

<comment><USER53> If you are already using Calibre, it's not hard to protect yourself from Amazon. I have a Kindle PaperWhite that's about ~3 years old and it only connected to the Internet once during initial setup. I've put it in flight mode after that and it will never go online again.

As for books, when I buy them on Amazon I select "transfer via USB" which let's me download it and when I add it to Calibre, the DRM is stripped by DEDRM_tools [1][2] before transfering into the Kindle.

[1] [https://github.com/apprenticeharper/DeDRM_tools](https://github.com/apprenticeharper/DeDRM_tools)

[2] Note that the tool only removes the DRM, it doesn't anonymise the file. It's still associated with your account.

<comment><USER52> Hey, thanks for your reply, I appreciate it.

I've used deDRM a lot in the past, but it doesn't work with the latest DRM on (I think AWZ3 files) - but perhaps it's been updated since I last checked about 6 months ago or so.

<comment><USER53> I use it with AWZ3 just fine, but then I also haven't allowed my Kindle to update its software in years, so maybe Amazon is giving me files with older DRM.

<comment><USER54> I bought a few books a couple of months ago from Amazon for use with their PC viewer and the first thing i did was to remove the DRM (so i can read it on my phone using my preferred ebook reader... and i trust myself more than Amazon to keep the books around) so i think they managed to break the latest version too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> I'm unfamiliar with Microsoft's eBook offerings and the format upon which they're offered. The old Microsoft would have had a proprietary format unique to themselves but that may not be the case.

Why couldn't they convert them to a standard format and put them up on an S3 with a login that pointed people to their virtual folders?

<comment><USER56> One assumes they'd put them up on Azure's version of S3, but that aside, no doubt no one knows if they can legally offer these things without DRM because of the contracts involved, and no one wants to take the risk.

Or they know they can't and don't want to go through the effort of getting new contracts.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> Every virtual-book service should be required to ship you a printed copy of every book you own if they are unable to maintain their service, _or_ significantly lower e-book pricing. They shouldn't get close to the same money for selling time bombs.

</comment><comment><USER58> Reminiscent of Microsoft's "Plays for Sure (TM)" branded DRM system for music which eventually did not allow anyone to play their purchased music anymore, contrary to the branding.

At least in this ebook case the customers are getting refunds.

</comment><comment><USER59> I use the Seth Godin model of ebook selling...

I sell my ebook on Amazon AND I give away the same ebook on my website FREE.

I give people the choice. Most buy the book.

To see one of the examples, Google:

Compiled: 713 Tai Lopez best quotes and quips revealed!

</comment><comment><USER60> Hence why I only buy ebooks that offer epub and pdf (DRM free) as additional formats, alongside kindle.

</comment><comment><USER61> DRM and watermarking of e-books should be banned. Copyright should be abolished.

</comment><comment><USER62> If there ever was a case for blockchain!

</comment><comment> nil-sec They refund them. Why is this an issue?

<comment><USER63> It's an issue if there were ebooks exclusive to Microsoft and not available anywhere else. You've lost access to something that you can't get access to (legally) again at any price.

<comment><USER64> Well, is that actually the case for any books?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER65> John Beezer built the Weed Share P2P music sharing service built on top of Microsoft's DRM. Microsoft discontinued the service without notice. All the music everyone bought was lost (unplayable).

<comment><USER65> These downvotes capture the "hate" portion of my relationship with HN.

Here's the cite:

[https://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/05/media_player_weedsh...](https://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/04/05/media_player_weedshare/)

I misremembered the technical details, but the end result is the same: user's lost the content they purchased.</comment></comment>


Bill Gates: I met with Epstein because "he knows a lot of rich people" - <AUTHOR> https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/10/bill-gates-met-with-jeffrey-epstein-to-connect-with-rich-people.html <comment><USER2> I sometimes worry that the world of elite money has something akin to a secular version of "The Family"[1] that essentially uses the "King David" excuse on people like Epstein.

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fellowship_(Christian_orga...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fellowship_\(Christian_organization\)) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family:_The_Secret_Fundame...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family:_The_Secret_Fundamentalism_at_the_Heart_of_American_Power) [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family_(miniseries)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Family_\(miniseries\))

<comment><USER3> Why not a strong overlap?

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> The simplest answer to me is the rampant normalization of celebrity sexual misconduct, especially the more philanthropically-oriented. The tipping point for Bill Cosby wasn't a criminal investigation or tell-all, just Hannibal Burress offhandedly mentioning the (decade old?) claims in a set.

It's confusing to me that we see Bill Gates as a particularly exceptional member of the philanthropic class outside of his extreme wealth. Perhaps the increasing popularity of "Effective Altruism"/Peter Singer's ideas, which align fairly well with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation's work. Perhaps it was his ability to avoid scandal.

</comment><comment><USER5> In this thread, and across the press, there's this ridiculous guilt by association epidemic going around.

So now, if I met Epstein one time at MIT, without knowing his crimes, I'm a pedophile too?

What exactly is Gates being accused of here? Just come out and say it? You guys want him to be a pedophile too so you can tear him down? Gates has done so much good for the world.

If Gates is found to have done something wrong, I'll be the first to call him a scumbag.

Till then, stop hating on him.

<comment><USER6> Epstein was convicted of soliciting a prostitute and of procuring an underage girl for prostitution in 2008 [see his wikipedia page]([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein)). There were rumors about him well before that

Bill Gates met with him in 2013. Why did Gates decide to meet with a convicted sex offender and pedophile? I think that, for powerful people, "not setting up meetings with sex offenders" is actually a pretty easy and straightforward ethical bar.

<comment><USER7> Not everyone is clued into rumors or googling everyone they meet.

<comment><USER8> Did you just dismissively state that high society is above gossip?

<comment><USER7> Existentially quantified, no. Universally quantified, yes. (Key: "not everyone")

Bill Gates is not really typical high society anyways.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> It appears that in the case of Epstein, anyone who knew the criminal is judged by the media as also guilty.

Seems weird and wrong ...

<comment><USER6> Epstein was convicted of soliciting a prostitute and of procuring an underage girl for prostitution in 2008 [see his wikipedia page]([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein)). Gates met with him in 2013.

No one's saying that meeting with Epstein was illegal, but I think that most people would avoid schmoozing with convicted pedophile sex offenders. When someone as powerful as Gates meets with someone and helps facilitate donations through them, that supports that person. Why did Gates choose to associate with and support a convicted sex offender and pedophile?

I think these are very very reasonable questions to ask

<comment><USER7> > Why did Gates choose to associate with and support a convicted sex offender > and pedophile?

Do we know Gates was aware of it? If not, do we expect him or his entourage to background check (or at least google) everyone he is going to meet? If yes, then I guess I would want to know as well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> >There were people around him who were saying, hey, if you want to raise money for global health and get more philanthropy, he knows a lot of rich people.

I like the impression of a clueless Bill Gates with 100 Billion dollars in his hand and having lead one of the most powerful businesses of last century, completely unsure of how to get in touch with other rich people. "Gee Jeffrey, do you think you could help me make some more rich friends to help with good deeds?"

I also feel like that sentence was a bit truncated "he knows a lot of rich people... because he runs a sex island where influential people can get and do anything they want."

<comment><AUTHOR> Gates's excuses and self-contradictory statements around Epstein have been hilariously bad.

</comment></comment><comment><USER11> Any story that details tech bigwigs having connections with Jeffrey Epstein gets flagged down here almost instantly. Which is too bad, the sheer volume of these connections indicates there's a conversation to be had here.

<comment><USER12> I think it might be a reaction to either a) what amounts to the same story with a different name over and over or a reaction to b) a number of stories that seemed to be out for blood against tech.

Epstein had connections to rich and powerful people in tech... And entertainment, and politics, and really all industry.

I think it's just a hard story to keep up with. Too many connections without enough investigation to if those connections are tied to his crimes (yet).

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> Taking money from a pedophile, going into business with one, endorsing one, securing favors from one, or receiving praise from one is pretty bad. Just meeting one seems significantly less. Not clear what Gates actually did.

</comment><comment><USER14> > Gates did not immediately respond to questions, submitted through a > foundation representative, about why he would need Epstein's help connecting > with wealthy people and whether it is typical for his business meetings to > include no women.

That was my first thought too: Sir Bill Gates is known by just about anyone in the world, certainly all rich people. He doesn't know them, yet, but of all people in the world, I would expect him to be the last to need someone like Epstein to introduce him.

<comment><AUTHOR> Why does he even need to ask around for an extra $2 million in the first place? I mean, I get that not all of his $100 billion fortune is entirely liquid at any point in time, but surely this should be doable in pretty short order?

<comment><USER11> The point is for him to position himself not just as a guy with a fat checkbook, but as a _macher_ (see [https://jel.jewish- languages.org/words/325](https://jel.jewish-languages.org/words/325)) -- a guy who can make connections, put people together. "I don't think your project is a good fit for my foundation, but let me introduce you to my friend Jeffrey and these four other rich guys who fund projects like yours all the time." So now you still owe him a favor, but without him having to spend a penny.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> Okay, so how does this make any sense?

> _" He never donated any money to anything that I know about."[...]

>Following the 2013 meeting between the two men, Epstein arranged for a $2 million donation from Gates to the MIT Media Lab, according to a report in The New Yorker. A spokesperson for Gates said in a statement provided to the Journal that "any claim that Epstein directed any programmatic or personal grantmaking for Bill Gates is completely false."_

So 5 years after Epstein is officially convicted of soliciting underaged prostitutes Bill Gates pretends as if he doesn't know who Epstein is, and somehow seems clueless of any donations despite having Epstein arrange a 2 million dollar donation, while also being one of the richest and most well connected people on the planet? These people cannot be serious.</comment>


Ask HN: Where's the beef--er--Search? - <AUTHOR>

I'm probably being really dense here. Where is the search?  I'm trying to look up community sentiment on a vendor, Chargify.  Is there a simple text lookup, hash, some input field I'm not activating/seeing? <comment><USER2> searchyc.com or the search link at the bottom of every page on this site

</comment><comment><USER3> <http://searchyc.com></comment>


Santa Monica bans all single-use plastics in the food and beverage industry - <AUTHOR> http://www.laist.com/2018/08/15/say_goodbye_to_straws_and_other_single-use_plastics_in_santa_monica.php <comment><USER2> Good! I've more and more come to the opinion that the only real way to push against bad behavior on a large scale, is through laws and regulation.

For example, it's disappointing to see the latest line of ICE cars (well, Volvo 2018) still be at the same level (L/km) as my previous, almost 20 years old car (Volvo 2001). Sure, the motor power might be increased while not increasing consumption, but that's the wrong way to spend the gains IMO.

</comment><comment><USER3> This comes with some pro's and cons. Some of "plastics" that is used for food and beverage is very helpful for some people with disabilities and sickness.

Why not make a bill out of it instead of banning those completely?</comment>


ARM Mali accelerators support in Linux 5.2 - <AUTHOR> https://lists.gt.net/linux/kernel/3309260#3309260 <comment><USER2> This is exciting for quite a few boards and notebooks, notably the new Pinebook Pro (RK3399) and the Asus C201 (RK3288) both benefiting from the Panfrost driver.

I wrote a bit a while back on Reddit regarding my experience with the C201 and Linux: [https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/bebm93/linux_on_asus...](https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/bebm93/linux_on_asus_chromebook_c201/)

Now with open 3D acceleration, the last remaining bit of proprietary code on the C201 is the WiFi chip. Not sure how much of an impact it'll have, but when Cypress bought Broadcom's wireless division it released the datasheet for this and many other chips (PDF): [https://www.cypress.com/file/298141/download](https://www.cypress.com/file/298141/download)

Alyssa Rosenzweig is making amazing progress with Panfrost working at Collabora. Panfrost is now working with GNOME, two months ahead of schedule!: [https://rosenzweig.io/blog/gnome-meets- panfrost.html](https://rosenzweig.io/blog/gnome-meets-panfrost.html)

<comment><USER3> Sadly it is hard to get a new C201PA these days? It is a 3 year old machine that has been discontinued.

But it is truly unique as you pointed out, it can be run almost binary blob free or totally free if you replace the wireless chip (simply plug in a tiny Atheros USB adapter).

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> We are finally getting a viable alternative to the x86 ecosystem. It's about time. Thank you to everyone putting in the work on this.

<comment><USER5> I wish ARM was open about the video hardware as Intel and AMD are.

</comment></comment><comment><USER6> Anyone know if this is relevant to the odroid n2? [https://www.hardkernel.com/shop/odroid-n2-with-4gbyte- ram/](https://www.hardkernel.com/shop/odroid-n2-with-4gbyte-ram/)

It's a superb recently released board but with v limited GPU support at the minute.

<comment><USER7> The board doesn't have upstream kernel support (like almost all SBCs unfortunately) so unless a) the Mali on the ODroid is included in this support (Different Mali generations have quite different interfaces) and b) the Mali support was the main thing preventing upstream kernel support (which is possible but unlikely), I'd it's likely to be irrelevant :(

<comment><USER8> Upstream / mainline support for G12A has been added in this release. Odroid-N2 (based on the similar G12B) support will most likely land in 5.3 [1].

[1] [http://linux-meson.com/doku.php#kernel_mainlining_progress](http://linux- meson.com/doku.php#kernel_mainlining_progress)

<comment><USER7> Oh that's great, my mistake!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER9> Previous discussion: [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19908741](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19908741)

</comment><comment><USER10> I'm super-excited to see this come together. I've been working on an aarch64-based product with a Mali GPU, and it's been so frustrating to be stuck on the ancient vendor kernel for no reason other than "it's the one that the Mali blobs are compiled against". I can't wait for this to be a non-issue for us. Thank you to the developers working on this, and to the companies sponsoring it!

</comment><comment><USER11> I'll wait for mesa 19.2 (end of august), which is other part of this.

</comment><comment><USER12> This is great news for Pine64 and their Pinephone.

</comment><comment><USER13> Does it mean my cheap Orange Pi 3 will be neck to neck with Raspberry Pi4?

<comment><USER14> No, these are very very early reverse-engineered drivers. They will likely fail to run lots of EGL applications.

The driver for the VC6 in the RPi4 is mature and written by someone with access to the underlying hardware definition code and full Broadcom documentation.

<comment><USER11> VC4 is no powerhorse, so...

[https://www.notebookcheck.net/ARM- Mali-T720-MP2.145232.0.htm...](https://www.notebookcheck.net/ARM- Mali-T720-MP2.145232.0.html) [https://www.notebookcheck.net/Broadcom- VideoCore-IV.116484.0...](https://www.notebookcheck.net/Broadcom-VideoCore- IV.116484.0.html)

      See 3DMark - Ice Storm Standard Graphics 1280x720

VC VI is maybe 30% faster than VC IV.

So it looks like Opi3 may be pretty much in the same (low) performance bracket with RPi4.

<comment><USER14> That's with an optimized vendor driver, which will perform vastly better than what is currently in the kernel & Mesa. I'd agree that the VC6 and T720 are probably equal levels of terrible, though, just from a hardware capability PoV.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> DRM is of course critical, but what is the status of Mesa drivers so we can have actual OpenGL and I guess also Vulkan these days?

</comment><comment><USER16> This means, Raspberry Pi will be able to perform much better on kernel 5.2?

<comment><USER17> Nah, RaspbPi uses Broadcom Videocore as its GPU, not ARM Mali.

<comment><USER18> Modern Malis are amazing.

I am not sure if there are any benchmark websites but I feel that Broadcom's Videocore technology is way behind most of the high end smartphone GPU competition, such as Mali, Adreno, PowerVR, etc.

<comment><USER19> That's a given. Broadcom effectively abandoned Videocore. The only significant user of Videocore GPUs nowadays is the Raspberry Pi and this is a thorn in Broadcom's eye.

<comment><USER20> It's interesting then that the RPi4 has a VideoCore6 vs 4 with a ton more features. I'm not sure why Broadcom would put in the work if RPi was the only real consumer.

<comment><USER14> Because the VideoCore 6 is also already an ancient design. And last I checked Broadcom is still doing set top box stuff, which is where these chips are from:

[https://www.broadcom.com/products/broadband/set-top- box](https://www.broadcom.com/products/broadband/set-top-box)

I guess they are just reducing their efforts as set top boxes are phased out in favor of smart TVs or Android TV and similar.

<comment><USER4> The Pi chips are probably surplus. This is how many SBC vendors are able to sell their boards so cheaply. It's a good repurposing as well, lots of these chips were going to sit in warehouses until the end of time.

<comment><USER14> The Pi chips are not surplus and never have been after the original Raspberry.

<comment><USER21> Yeah, every Raspberry Pi chip that came after the original was custom designed and created for the sole purpose of being used in Raspberry Pis. They just made some... interesting design decisions.

<comment><USER22> The Raspberry Pi Foundation was definitely optimizing for the IP their volunteers & employees were familiar with and had confidence in.

Other boards beat the Raspberry Pi in mainline kernel support, USB & Ethernet I/O & price years ago, but there is a significant ecosystem that the Foundation seeks to support, and the best way they know how to do so is with the tools they are intimately familiar with.

<comment><USER23> > Other boards beat the Raspberry Pi in mainline kernel support, USB & > Ethernet I/O & price years ago

You sound knowledgeable, so I'll ask: if you don't care about the RPi ecosystem (or IoT use-cases at all, really), what's the optimum SBC across all those axes currently? Like, what board would you choose to base a cheap one- off HTPC+NAS on?

<comment><USER22> I like the OrangePi lineup, particularly the OrangePi PC Plus as it has 8GB eMMC and decent specs while being sub-$30 with a case and accessories: [https://m.aliexpress.com/item/32668421022.html](https://m.aliexpress.com/item/32668421022.html)

For a NAS, nearly all of the OrangePis feature USB ports & ethernet that are directly wired to the SOC, so you aren't I/O limited like older Raspberry Pi's. That being said, the Allwinner H3 doesn't support 10 bit Hevc/H.265 acceleration, so you might want to go with a board based on a newer chip for a HTPC. Take a peek at LibreELEC, they have a decent HTPC distro for many SBCs.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER24> Does this mean I can have 2d accel in X11 on my peach pit? with mainline since 3.6 or so it has been an excellent terminal and even music making machine, but browsing is a bit painful.

<comment><USER25> Any chance you have a link to the peach pit? Not turning up many SBCs by that name when I search for it...

<comment><USER24> [https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer- information-f...](https://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/developer-information- for-chrome-os-devices/samsung-chromebook-2)

Later they re-released a version with an intel cpu with the same branding, so the machine is hard to google.</comment></comment></comment>