• NFT screenshotter@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    3 years ago

    this sounds like a great idea, invite the big tech corporations who make almost all their profit off of closed source software to discuss the security of open source software with the US government

    • sibachian
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      3 years ago

      considering Darwin (unix/BSD) is open source and what MacOS, iOS, watchOS, tvOS, iPadOS and bridgeOS runs on (and by law, they can’t close that source code), I can’t see Apple arguing in favor of closed source software. Assuming they don’t have an entirely new inhouse OS in the pipelines that they’re planning to replace Darwin with.

      • const_void
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        Assuming they don’t have an entirely new inhouse OS in the pipelines that they’re planning to replace Darwin with.

        They created their own CPUs. A new OS doesnt seem out of the realm of possibility.

        • ganymede
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 years ago

          not to nitpick, ‘core’ parts of that cpu were licensed. not saying they didn’t do a good job with it, they certainly did.

          either way, agree they could develop their own OS. but i doubt they will at this stage.

      • NFT screenshotter@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        Darwin (unix/BSD) is open source […] and by law, they can’t close that source code

        Darwin is open source to avoid having to open source other components to macOS while still adhering to various licenses for software it depends on for. If Apple could legally close source that part of the OS they would in a heartbeat, they’ve already gone out of their way to make it nearly impossible to use by (iirc) obfuscating the compiler forcing users to reverse engineer the compiling process for newer versions of darwin.

        • sibachian
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          they would if they could. which is my point. without a replacement OS in the pipes, apple would be shooting themselves by demonizing open source software in front of the government.