this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2025
669 points (98.7% liked)

No Stupid Questions

43290 readers
851 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] DoctorPress@lemmy.zip 21 points 2 days ago

We already have "secure boot" BS. For now it's easy to turn off but it's only a matter of time before getting locked and forced everywhere.

[–] Smoogs@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (2 children)

And just like that I’m all about Ubuntu phones now

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] surph_ninja@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

That’s the whole intention of requiring TPM for Windows 11. It’s coming soon.

They also banned Kaspersky in the states because they weren’t whitelisting state malware.

[–] handsoffmydata@lemmy.zip 8 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Now? Doesn’t M$ still release the "S" mode version of Windows that only allow downloads via their "official App Store"?

[–] xvertigox@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

My girlfriends laptop came with S mode and holy shit, I just about threw it out the window. I knew Windows 11 would be dogshit but when I couldn't run firefoxinstaller.exe I got so annoyed. I then spent ~30 minutes troubleshooting how to allow running fucking exes as the guides were all out of date, including the one that were a month old.

I've been using Linux and XP for a few years now and god damn does it feel gross to use Win11. Not having control over your own PC is disgusting.

[–] handsoffmydata@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago

Windows machines make great Linux devices. Hope your gf likes her new Ubuntu laptop :)

[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 3 points 2 days ago

You can convert to the home edition for free (for now at least)

Also you can disable secure boot and just install linux.

[–] neon_nova@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 2 days ago

I kind of expect this to happen with Apple's rumored $600 macbook. Since they just updated ipadOS to run like a locked down version of macOS. I bet they will offer this cheap mac with the same locked down OS since it will have a "phone" processor in it.

They will say this was a compromise needed, but the majority of people will not care. After a few years, the macs that are open will get more and more expensive.

I'm guessing Windows will slowly start to move in thie direction, but I think they will try to push their remote computers thing to accomplish this.

I'm not sure about bootloaders being locked, I am guessing there will always be something that is unlocked and able to run linux though. It is needed for servers and stuff like that. In the worst case, someone will likely sell arm or risc-v powered boards that can be used to run linux.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 14 points 2 days ago

Didn't MS already try this with Windows S editions?

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 29 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's not going to happen.

Motherboard manufacturers are not going to start making Windows only BIOS.

Microsofts target audience isn't the private user. It's companies. The money they make selling their OS to private persons are table scraps compared to their enterprise licenses. Any such initiative would fuck over every single enterprise customer.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 10 points 3 days ago (4 children)

It's been attempted in two ways.
First is secure boot. There were a handful of computers sold that did not allow disabling of secure boot, or changing the loaded keys. So it was basically essentially a Windows only computer.
More recently is there was Microsoft Windows S. This was a cheap version of Windows Home that ran on low end computers and was locked to only allow installing apps from the Microsoft store. It was possible to unlock it but as I recall it required an additional fee.

Enterprises almost all run Windows anyway so they DGAF.

[–] Atomic@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

Enterprises use a lot, and I do mean A LOT of custom software. Either developed in house or by others. They absolutely care.

What Microsoft does within their own OS, as the "S" version you're talking about. That's a non issue given you can just flash the drive and install whatever OS you want.

As for the concern that you'd somehow be unable to install another OS. Due to Secure Boot. I personally have never come across a computer that I've had full BIOS access to that didn't allow disabling secure boot. Though some have been more cooperative than others. But maybe I'm just lucky.

But I'm also pretty sure there are linux distributions that support Secure Boot.

Secure Boot for what it's intended to do, is a pretty good feature. Which is to stop unauthorized software from running before initiating your OS

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 18 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This is already happening, but it's on an organisational level by policy. These policies can be applied to systems that follow trusted computing rules, which is most Windows 10 systems and pretty much all windows 11 systems. Google has laid the groundwork for this since the pixel 3 was released in 2018.

Since then, we have seen Google put the Titan security module in all phones and I'm certain Chromebooks are requiring TPM modules that serve the same function.

Apple has been doing the same since God knows when. Their systems have had unique chips that ensure that when MacOS is installed, it is only installed in Apple computers. There are ways around this, just as there are ways around the TPM requirement for Windows 11.

The trusted computing model, when fully imposed, can basically stop any applications from running that have not been given the blessing of the security team.

As far as I'm aware, the only people taking advantage of the technology are government institutions.

The fact that this can be wielded to enforce control over private individuals by our corporate masters is becoming a very real possibility, but the fact that it hasn't happened yet, by any vendor, is, in my opinion, good evidence to say that it's unlikely, but not impossible. Maybe that's wishful thinking on my part.

In any case, the only truly free operating system left is GNU/Linux, with few other exceptions.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

They're waiting until all the products in the wild can be locked down.

Right now, they're struggling to get people.to jump to Windows 11, and people are hoarding their old computers. They want all the products that don't have TPM or its equivalent to be outmoded before they remove the mask.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] xia@lemmy.sdf.org 19 points 3 days ago

IIRC, I had a PC (since sold) that had secure boot permanently enabled from the factory. That is, in spirit, a PC with a "locked bootloader", but you might not even notice because many Linux distros have that Microsoft-blessed Linux loading shim... but it is still Microsoft inserting themselves between you and your hardware; they could decide in the next few years they no longer "support" Linux, hypothetically.

[–] anothernobody@lemmy.world 141 points 4 days ago (25 children)

With Linux being the standard for server systems there is no way to force locked bootloaders everywhere without making the whole web and a lot of companies collapse. But I expect more limitations regarding desktop systems. It's hard to tell at this point because it's a complex issue, not only from an economical but also political point of view (Mass surveillance).

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] fluffykittycat@slrpnk.net 11 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Fear of this is why I have been hoarding any computer that runs for a long time now

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world 73 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

Microsoft is already starting to lay the groundwork with their CPU, SecureBoot, and TPM 2.0 requirements.

Apple has been doing this for a long time, though there are ways to get around it on MacOS, for now.

On PC, the answer is Linux. For mobile devices, things are looking more bleak.

[–] Korhaka@sopuli.xyz 27 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Linux won't be an option if the boot loader is locked. I think Linux is just about popular enough that options should remain but they might become reduced unless it becomes more popular than it currently is.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Aimeeloulm@feddit.uk 24 points 3 days ago (2 children)

To all those people saying this will never happen because people wouldn't accept or tolerate it ree living in a different reality, sorry to burst your bubble and faith in your fellow himans but....most people will just whinge whine cuss and then go do something else, people today have no guts in them to fight back and to lazy too, they expect others to do all the work for them, but wont lift a finger except to moan and whine about shit.

Long story short we are fucked, absolutely fucked, we....those that would/will do something are few and far between now, people aka the masses are used to being beaten down and being told to put up and shut up, just get on with it, so we few just have to look after ourselves, our families and friends, get through life best way we can, we be a small pocket of resistance but thats all sadly 🥺

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cley_faye@lemmy.world 43 points 3 days ago (1 children)

It's been tried a bit before, but didn't get through. The current situation with secure boot is worrying, because we're one manufacturer playing ball away from it to become a reality.

I'd like to say there's strong incentive to not do that, but it seems that logic alone would not stop this kind of push. And weirdly enough, even financial risk might not be enough, as we've seen baffling decisions made these last few months.

The main saving graces is that there are more than two manufacturer for motherboard, and as far as I know, patent lockdown and secrecy isn't as big on PC hardware than on mobile boards, so it might be easier to escape such lockdown. But fully locked down systems under external control is clearly where some people wants us to go.

[–] brax@sh.itjust.works 19 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Users are getting dumber by the day. The people arguing back to me about "this is a you problem" when I mention reasons why device ownership is important is way too fucking high.

This is why you gatekeep hobbies. Keep the dipshits out so they don't become the masses that ruin what you enjoy.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 16 points 3 days ago (2 children)

For phones Google gets to decide, as an os maker. For PCs, there are multiple OSses so hardware manufacturers get to decide.

I personally don't see AMD or Intel doing that anytime soon, and if they do, at least Arm and Risc-V are making some good progress in the desktop space

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] calamityjanitor@lemmy.world 89 points 4 days ago (2 children)

It's called secure boot and it's been around for over 10 years now.

[–] SkavarSharraddas@gehirneimer.de 40 points 4 days ago (2 children)

And the first iteration was much more locked down, only got changed after public complaints.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 34 points 3 days ago (16 children)

Too late to do this for PCs. You already have Linux laptop providers and Linux distros supported by corporations. Most of the components have multiple providers. You will be able to source "unlocked" hardware from somewhere.

The problem with mobile is that the hardware is too complicated for open source projects to handle. Many have tried, all have failed. So far. Hopefully we will finally see something usable come out of projects like PinePhone and PostmarketOS.

load more comments (16 replies)
[–] kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone 30 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I would say if/when PCs move over to ARM than we very well may see the same issues mobile devices have. There is a severe lack of Linux compatibility due to proprietary drivers, sometimes no drivers at all, no software support, and no device trees.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] TheLeadenSea@sh.itjust.works 62 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

This is what happened when we allowed companies with a profit incentive to code our devices. Linux will always be free, and there will be companies that design computers for Linux, such as Fairphone, Framework, Furi, Fedora, and probably some that don't start with F too

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Unlocking_Freedom@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Linux is quite well established now on home pc's and servers to the dismay of Microsoft and Apple. I hated Secureboot , built into UEFI, during startup by verifying the digital signatures of firmware, drivers, and the OS bootloader. Reading into Deep State Mass surveillance helps:

https://www.printernational.co.uk/timmann/history.htm#surveillance

[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Nothing says that Linux could eventually evolve into the same thing or fail to ever really function for the masses.

It's been done before. ChromeBooks comes to mind, but there have been others. Usually winds up killing the outfit that tries it.

As far as I know Chromebooks only survive because of the educational market. Locked down devices are preferable in schools.

I won't buy one, but I could see such systems becoming dominant in another 20 years or so.

[–] FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 7 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (12 children)

Microsoft are smart enough to not piss off every giant corporation and destroy their entire business overnight, so you can count on it never being forced by them.

[–] untorquer@lemmy.world 8 points 3 days ago (3 children)

They certainly wouldn't roll it out overnight but they've had their long term targets on OS as a service since Windows 8 and these things tend to come bundled.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[–] localhorst@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago

https://youtu.be/HUEvRyemKSg might be relevant.

Turns out some people can predict the future if they pay attention

[–] SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world 14 points 3 days ago (5 children)

Never

It isn't gonna happen

The enshittification would be too much, and people would gravitate twoards the more usable tech.

People liked Apple and Google because they offered simplified UX that still let people access what they wanted, as soon as people feel too restricted they will stop using the tech.

This trend is independent and unimpeded by the legality of the tech.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] blargh513@sh.itjust.works 35 points 4 days ago (7 children)

It will creep in slowly since most people dont touch any settings on their computer after the initial unboxing and setup.

Big box retailers will offer discounts on them, much like how you can buy a Chromebook for very little.

Enticed by cheap computers, people will buy not knowing that any limitations exist. They'll be encouraged to use centralized app repositories but they can still install some other stuff.

A year or two later, some things won't be permitted, computer will make scary warnings when installing, but with enough clicking, you can get past. Until the day you can't.

It will be a progression, but it will happen eventually. I honestly am surprised that computers dont require some sort of registration. I'm sure that will happen eventually.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›