Elektrine lite

← Feed

@grepe@ieji.de

Post #3278025

2026-06-10 00:47 UTC

@lumi@snug.moe @jdelacueva@mastodon.social @IvanSanchez@mastodon.social @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @fruitchypear@owo.cafe @greatlaketrout@noc.social ownership is not the important thing here although in my example it allows them to exercise control without further issues. the point i was trying to make was better management. company takes away the control to make it easier for them to manage the devices in a way that is beneficial for the organisation. government does the same for the community when it does regulation. there is a reason why you cannot take just any car to a public road to pick one example from many. and you could also argue, in the same way as you do for computers/phones, that it's their car and every driver should just be educated and know that their car needs things like seat belts or rear mirrors.

Replies (1)

  • @lumi@snug.moe 2026-06-10 15:44

    @grepe@ieji.de @jdelacueva@mastodon.social @IvanSanchez@mastodon.social @EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu @fruitchypear@owo.cafe @greatlaketrout@noc.social seatbelts and mirrors don't restrict the driver; the driver is also still free not to use them. tho if they get caught, they get penalized remote attestation tech restricts the user massively on what could arguably be called an extension of their body. no-one should have the "freedom" to tell me what I can or can't do with my body or my devices

    Open ##3278026