kalistia

I agree with you that it would be foolish to believe that any company would support a cheap device perpetually but I think it should be common practice (or mandatory) to open the software so that people can extend the life of these devices. Generally speaking, as a species we cannot afford to waste electronic devices simply because the software is not up to date.

Well, the article says: "Google says it will continue to push software and security updates to its newer devices without specifying which ones.".

So only newer devices (and we don't know which ones), and if you are a bit familiar with technology, you would very well know that they will just quit updating the software anyways after some time as they stopped making the whole Chromecast line.

That's still a lot of devices that would be perfectly usable and will eventually go to waste. So imo my remark about the fact that we should have laws forcing manufacturers to make their software open source as soon as they're no longer updated is still valid!

And? Do they plan to put all the software open source so that the millions of hardware they sold would not go to waste in some years? We should force them to by law.

They had Tchap that may not be perfect but is open source (based on matrix/element), hosted in France and already used by 400 000 ppl from the public services... Why pay for a new app? Don't get it...

My non-pro question is : if it was a peer-to-peer service like element, using a decentralized protocol like matrix, wouldn't it be a huge cost saver because of less data bandwidth and server costs?

https://giphy.com/gifs/harvey-korman-aKZij6fdoGtOw

Well from the very wikipedia article you're quoting, it seems that it is a fake and more of a "revenge" thing from people with bad intentions. To be fair, there is already a lot to be said about Cameron without the need to pass on gossip, don't you think?

To be honest, the only reasonable question is: what are these people still doing on this crappy thing?