Monday, July 26, 2010
Wow, what a great idea! This is entirely useful, I must say. Sounds too good to be true, right? We can all do whatever the hell we want, thanks to the Gov., regardless of what rules any number of companies put in place.
"Owners of the iPhone will be able to break electronic locks on their devices in order to download applications that have not been approved by Apple. The government is making that legal under new rules announced Monday.
The decision to allow the practice commonly known as "jailbreaking" is one of a handful of new exemptions from a federal law that prohibits the circumvention of technical measures that control access to copyrighted works."
- The Associated Press
No. No no no. This is not useful. This is the exact opposite. This is interference. This is the Gov. attempting to remdy something that NEEDS NO CHANGING. If people want to Jailbreak their devices, they assume 100% responsibility for what happens to it when they think they know what they're doing.
Has anyone really gotten to use a Jailbroken device? Those that answered yes, how many can say that the experience was optimal? Are we kidding ourselves here? Anyone can Jailbreak the iPhone if they want. Why should the Gov. come in and say that now Apple has to provide service to the suckers that do, when something gets screwed up, because THEY did it?
What is left to gain? Some really poor applications that didn't make the cut? Use of tethering when you didn't sign up for it with AT&T? Use of T-Mobile's network that explicitly breaks the AT&T exclusivity that's legally in place between them and Apple? What is there to gain from this?
This is bull. I'm sick of the Gov. sticking their noses and other appendages where they don't belong. It's about f'n time that SOMEONE with real power steps up in regards to this. What hand does the Gov. have in the consumer electronics market? NONE. 0. Bill Gates / Steve Jobs / Al Gore better do something, before the Gov. regulates what can and can't be on my iPod -- OH WAIT...
I'm sick of the Gov. having everyone by the cajones, while whatever they say goes, whether the vast majority of the American people agree or oppose. King Obama, ball's in your court, and naturally it's your best sport.
I didn't vote for these people. I voted for one president who was the lesser of two evils. I never said that person could do what is being done, the way it's being done.
Let me break it down even further...
In the current situation, Apple is against jailbreaking, and if they find you have jailbroken your device, they can deny service in regards to voiding their terms. In the new proposed situation, Apple can now not deny service to those who have jailbroken their devices. The user owns the phone, and can do what they want, and Apple can not say no to the user.
The problem with this is, Apple has set up a environment where they can control the quality of the product after it has left the hands of any Apple employee, and entered the hands of the user. If the user takes that product home, and jailbreaking - some third party's work - screws up that user's product, why should Apple help the user, when the third party is to blame, and neither Apple or the third party can affect one another? The only contact the user and the third party has, is through the product, when one or the other directly affect it in any way. A vs C via B / C vs A via B.
In the words of my main man Charile Brown:
I just can't stand it.
Posted by SkippyThorson at 12:24 PM