[devilsadvocate]

NOTE: Lest I be accused of thread-hijacking, *right now* I'm having a killer conversation with Dennis so !

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I don't know anything about the Saudi legal system, but I suspect they have channels that should be gone through and sign offs that have to happen before an arm of the Saudi government could get access to a Saudi Blackberry subscriber's mail. There may be rather less due process than we have, and a much broader notion of what constitutes something they would see fit to take action over, but there will be a process.

Alkarama for human rights is a NGO similar to Human Rights Watch only focused specifically on the Middle East. Lots of stories of people imprisoned for years with not so much as a visit to a judge.

Here is a New York Times story on the pending execution of a guy who appears to be nothing more than a Lebanese version of John Edward. Granted America still has that little Guantanamo issue to clean up but could you imagine if, instead of a fine for fraud, we actually beheaded Miss Cleo? That's outside the bounds of "cultural differences" if you ask me.

I won't fill space with links; I just Googled "Saudi due process" and I got the impression these incidents aren't the only ones. I just have a really hard time believing due process as any rational person understands it is the rule and not the exception, enough so that I wouldn't want to visit the region in order to test the theory. The only people I know who had rarely left the compound as they were support personnel with the Air Force.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

You can actually make a case that such responsibility shouldn't be necessary. Unfortunately, it is.

I wouldn't. See below.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I'm active on occasion on a site devoted to a flavor of Linux where most of the folks who hang out see Ubuntu as the antithesis of what they think a distro ought to be. They rail about the annoyance of not having root by default and needing to use sudo, and how hard (they think) Ubuntu makes it to pop the hood and learn about the system.

A distro "ought to be" whatever you make it. I thought that was the whole point. I feel that *buntu has contracted a case of Windows-itis in the quest to be all things to all people but I don't think of Shuttleworth as the Anti-Christ as a result of that pursuit, just as I didn't harbor an irrational hatred of Bill Gates back when it was fashionable to do so. I do think it raises an interesting question of who "properly" represents Linux however.

FWIW, I run ArchLinux, which is a first-gen distro (i.e. not based on something else) and most decidedly not for beginners; sudo works just fine and when I review a distro for my site, the first thing I do is install sudo and add my user to the sudoers list. Somehow I still manage to have complete control of my system. Maybe those guys are trying to make up for something...I would consider myself a power-user and If I have to log in as root for anything after the install is done, either I'm doing something wrong or the distro isn't ready for prime-time, usually (but not always ) the latter.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

My analogy is to the automobile. You can own a drive a car without being a mechanic or knowing the principles of the four stroke internal combustion engine. For things beyond fixing a flat, you pay a specialist to work on it.

We aren't quite there yet with computers. You need to have some understanding of how the system works to get the most out of it. But development has been focused on increasingly higher levels of abstraction, reducing what the user had to know to be able to use the machine at all.

I completely agree with the car analogy (in fact that's a well-worn tool; see the "Required Reading" tab at my site if you haven't already)..one doesn't necessarily need a knowledge of the inner workings of the OS/motor, though it helps to make better use of the machine/car when you have that knowledge. Responsibility is another matter; you also don't have to understand programming/the laws of physics to know you're going to mess up your install/run into something if you don't pay attention while using the machine/driving. Sadly, this lack of responsibility continues to be a problem both in the real and metaphorical sense. I believe that with any technological advance comes responsibility even if you're not literally risking physical harm, and relieving a user of his/her need to think in such a situation sets a dangerous precedent; in neither instance should it just be a matter of operating the controls.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I can't be bothered to evangelize for Linux on the desktop. Most folks learn only as much as they have to to be able to use the system and accomplish what they want to do. They aren't likely to switch to Linux from Windows because it's different, and will require a learning curve they won't wish to come up.

I would say "amen", but, well...

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

If you have to get root because it's the only way to do something you want to do, there's a good case you bought the wrong phone.

Not necessarily; just as Ubuntu, which uses sudo and (initially) discourages root logins, cellphones have a wide userbase, many of whom want everything to "just work". Also, just as in Ubuntu, there is a way to enable root access for the enterprising in the rare case the need arises. The difference is, all phones running Android have direct root access locked down by default, so there isn't a "right" phone for that. In addition there's a liability issue: I can all but guarantee the local Verizon store has no interest in reviving bricked phones 10 times a day.