Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Well this is a straightforward sentiment with a real "my body, my choice" ring to it, isn't it? Until it isn't.

Perhaps your hardware, when connected to a network, has real effects on the rest of that network. What if your system joined a botnet and began DDOS activities for payment? What if your system was part of a residential proxy network, and could be rented in the grey market for any kind of use or abuse of others' systems? What if your system became a host for CSAM or copyright-violating materials, unbeknownst to you, until the authorities confiscated it?

And what if your hardware had a special privileged location on a corporate network, or you operated a VPC with some valuable assets, and that was compromised and commandeered by a state-level threat actor? Is it still "your hardware, your choice"? Or do your bad choices affect other people as well?



Man that is a silly line of thought. Your conclusion now has to be that all freedom is bad because peoples choices can have ramifications, yeah?

Oh, you chose to buy new shoes even though they were too tight which distracted you for 1 sec in your car on the way home, due to the discomfort, so you hit someone and they died.

Clearly people can not be trusted to buy their own shoes!


I got measles just reading this


There's the "Malicious Software Removal Tool" for that case.


I presume you use Apple products, right?


I guess I have to start audit all devices that connect to my home internet...oh wait


Geez what a cluster* of a comment. You mix in a bunch of theoreticals you came up with in 5 seconds that cover different domains and then don't actually go to the effort of critically examining your own statements, which is appreciated and makes for much higher quality comments.

>Perhaps your hardware, when connected to a network, has real effects on the rest of that network. What if your system joined a botnet and began DDOS activities for payment? What if your system was part of a residential proxy network, and could be rented in the grey market for any kind of use or abuse of others' systems?

This at least is "you, affecting others". But the obvious immediate response is that such things done via the network can be mitigated or blocked at the network layer, and indeed must be anyway since attackers are doing such things from across the world 24/7 regardless. I'd fully support ISPs having to throttle or even potentially block-until-fixed any customers who participate in active network attacks, and other parts of the internet throttling or black listing ISPs that refused to cooperate. But making someone deal with the consequences of their choices is no reason to deny them the choices in the first place, given that most of those making such choices are not, in fact, actually going to end up doing any of what you listed.

>What if your system became a host for CSAM or copyright-violating materials, unbeknownst to you, until the authorities confiscated it?

Here (and seriously ZOMG THINK OF THE CHILDREN, lol really? on HN, in 2025?) you veer off into personal consequences to the person making the choice, as opposed to them being part of an attack on others. This is just saying "there could be risks to you if you mess it up!" which is a complete non-statement.

>And what if your hardware had a special privileged location on a corporate network, or you operated a VPC with some valuable assets, and that was compromised and commandeered by a state-level threat actor? Is it still "your hardware, your choice"? Or do your bad choices affect other people as well?

Um. Hello? Why is corporate IT allowing you to BYOD to a special privileged location on the corporate network without even so much as any sort of management agreement or contractual responsibilities? At this point you've veered off the road of reality. Because in actual reality you don't own hardware in special privileged locations or at least don't have full choice over it by your own agreement. And if that's not the case hooboy is there a kind of a lot of other fundamental issues there. That's not an argument for a blanket universal policy.


[flagged]


cost-benefit. the time/electricity/battery/frustration cost of windows defender dwarfs its utility. i’d be better off with some east euro hackerman’s crypto miner running in the background than WSC. at least hackerman knows how to not peg my CPU at 90% while he’s mining his moneros.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: