alt Hacker NewsI would rather the law make it such that you really are buying, than codify that you own nothing. The ambiguity isn't great, on that we agree, but why would you weaken the citizen's standing to remove it?
Replies
zahlman • last Thursday at 4:57 PM
Should people really not have the option to not-buy if they see other advantages in it? Should the idea of ownership being valuable be imposed upon citizens? (And if we all accept that it has value, could that not simply reflect in a price differential?)
croes • yesterday at 5:45 AM
The law can’t change that you own nothing. What do you own if the company closes, if the shutdown their servers. Law can’t enforce that the servers keep running.
I want a tech shift to allow this concept. Ownership will require me to physically maintain my own data, or at least have the ability to do so. I really want personal cloud capabilities so that services like iTunes and others are required to be able to use my own personal, and completely independently maintained, storage. That way I could either self host or contract out but then Apple would loose their vendor lock-in and services like iTunes would be forced to play nicer. The core problem is the iCloud lock-in/bundling. If I were looking at anti-trust breakup I would start with this idea, forcing alternative cloud storage options.