Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nerdlingers

CPUs Inside Helix and Actual Hardware Upgrades

Recommended Posts

Is there a data sheet on the actual processors used inside the Helix floor model? I was thinking about upgrading the actual CPUs inside. One thing I was wondering is if the firmware recognizes DSP on the fly or is it coded into the firmware? For instance if I doubled the processing power would it still grey out blocks at the same time it would for the normal CPUs or is it calculated otherwise? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "CPU" used in modelers are actually real time SHARC DPS processors.  Upgrading one wouldn't likely be reasonable since they're not anything like a generalized computational CPU but dedicated real-time processors like those used in radars or other military real time applications.  Dropping a newer version or especially a different family of DSP chip would be inherently incompatible with the code base in the Helix.  The best way to think of DSP chips is they are high speed computational engines used in the manipulation of digital sound streams.  There are data sheets available on SHARC processors from the vendors that make them...all guaranteed to put you to sleep within minutes of reading them.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change your chip = change your coding!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea, that is one of those things you think about...

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Upgrading aka exchanging the processor will be pretty hard. I would not be surprised if those chips are actually BGA types, meaning: If you are not familiar with a reflow oven and have a pair of very skilled hands, this is close to impossible.

Even if you find a drop-in replacement with the same pin layout etc - as MusicLaw stated: If you change the chip, the code will have to now, usually at "compile" time.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Nerdlingers said:

I was thinking about upgrading the actual CPUs inside.


Yeah - right. Keep thinking - it’s not going to happen with the current hardware. Even if it was a possibility, have you considered the cost implications, and that is providing you could find someone able to supply a suitable chip. If you hadn’t noticed there is a bit of a crisis at the moment, even Apple are struggling to get supplies.
 

There is some information around here, or you could even use Google, to find just how much R&D time went into producing what we have now.

 

Meanwhile, if you want to expand your DSP stick a couple of HX Stomps in the Send/Return loops - not cheap but guaranteed to work and possibly easier solution.

 

Another option, Helix Native running on a powerful computer, and a 10 foot-switch MIDI controller. Native is only limited to the amount of processing muscle in your computer.


Have you considered that you may have bought the wrong product for the job. Unless you really are into circuit bending you shouldn’t need to butcher the hardware - you could simply buy a Quad Cortex as that appears to be what you are wanting to achieve.

 

Hope this helps/makes sense.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Nerdlingers said:

Is there a data sheet on the actual processors used inside the Helix floor model? I was thinking about upgrading the actual CPUs inside. One thing I was wondering is if the firmware recognizes DSP on the fly or is it coded into the firmware? For instance if I doubled the processing power would it still grey out blocks at the same time it would for the normal CPUs or is it calculated otherwise? 

 

This is the most detailed look I've seen at the Helix's innards. Have to agree with the other posts here though that this would probably be far more involved than just swapping DSPs out. The review was also done fairly early in the Helix's lifecycle so there is no guarantee some of the parts may not have changed.

 

Here is his writeup with the parts listed: https://tonymckenzie.com/line6-helix-effects-unit-floor-pedal-inside-and-out-review.htm

 

A video review where he went inside the Helix's chassis.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, HonestOpinion said:

A video review where he went inside the Helix's chassis.


Ye gods!

Is this lunatic still on the loose? He has a really good way of upsetting lots of people.

 

Here’s a sample from Harmony Central when he did a “review” of the Line 6 HD500

https://www.harmonycentral.com/forums/topic/1534841-an-idiot-demos-the-line-6-hd500/

 

He didn’t make many friends over in Fractal land either- Cliff is not a huge fan of the guy. Oh, yeah, and Kemper - in fact, way back he gave the Eleven Rack a good kicking too. He is a legend in his own mind. Do a little research on him - he has lots of websites under various names.

 

Oh, dear - not really a great example of opening a Helix - although, at least he knew his warranty was void by doing it.

I really thought I had seen the last of the “cat in the hat”.

Got to stop now my sides are aching!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, datacommando said:


Ye gods!

Is this lunatic still on the loose? He has a really good way of upsetting lots of people.

 

Here’s a sample from Harmony Central when he did a “review” of the Line 6 HD500

https://www.harmonycentral.com/forums/topic/1534841-an-idiot-demos-the-line-6-hd500/

 

He didn’t make many friends over in Fractal land either- Cliff is not a huge fan of the guy. Oh, yeah, and Kemper - in fact, way back he gave the Eleven Rack a good kicking too. He is a legend in his own mind. Do a little research on him - he has lots of websites under various names.

 

Oh, dear - not really a great example of opening a Helix - although, at least he knew his warranty was void by doing it.

I really thought I had seen the last of the “cat in the hat”.

Got to stop now my sides are aching!

 

LOL, I hear you and that HD500 review was definitely not one of his better moments. I know a lot of people take exception to his reviews, I have seen many a scathing rebuke of him. However he is one of the only reviewers actually deconstructing these devices in such depth. I find his reviews a useful resource for taking a look into the guts of devices I have no intention of taking apart myself.

 

His conclusions on the other hand have frequently been controversial as he seems to heavily weight the overall worth of a device from a component/hardware oriented perspective, sometimes unaware or mistaken about some of some of the device's other features and software or firmware attributes or the fact that it doesn't necessarily need the latest and greatest chip to be worthwhile or even great. Literally that the whole can be greater than the sum of the parts. I know he has skewered some devices I am rather fond of but I still thinks he makes some valuable contributions to the range of reviews available on any given device. Reviews that run the gamut from fawning salesmen to unabashed trolls.

 

Ultimately I am a fan of reviews that take a look at the component level in devices as I find them interesting and I believe they help, if only marginally, to keep manufacturers honest about recycling old technology into newer devices. Not necessarily a practice that condemns the device to inferiority but certainly not a practice conducive to future-proofing either.  Some mighty shiny devices that look great on the outside can house some fairly dated technology within. Like most reviews I take his with a grain of salt and weigh them against other opinions, including my own.

 

Note: His review on the Helix was overall positive and quite reassuring as to the quality of the components used.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, datacommando said:

Have you considered that you may have bought the wrong product for the job. Unless you really are into circuit bending you shouldn’t need to butcher the hardware - you could simply buy a Quad Cortex as that appears to be what you are wanting to achieve.

 

No I love my Helix but I like to mess around with tech.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, cruisinon2 said:

I was thinking of upgrading my kidneys... how big should I go? ;)

 

I believe one cubic inch for every finger of scotch or can of beer consumed per evening is the rule of thumb.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To state the obvious, in many respects current modelers are a computer specialized to generate and process sound. Although modelers have in common with each other the identical goal of emulating amps and effects and often providing a recording interface, where they differ from computers is the higher degree of specialization in the UI, firmware, and software that sit on top of the hardware. These can vary wildly from one manufacturer to another and seem, to some extent, have lent license to companies not being particularly forthcoming about the hardware that underlies them. You don't just slap the identical version of Microsoft or Mac OS and Office onto every single modeler. There is no comprehensive benchmarking application for modelers. Not having an identical yardstick applied to all hardware makes it less compulsory to provide hardware details that make it easier to predict how different hardware platforms will perform . In many respects this is a good thing as hardware is hardly the sole factor in providing the mojo that makes for a great modeler. Protecting intellectual property probably plays a role here as well.

 

Although modeler manufacturers tout certain specs they are particularly proud of, often they are not very comprehensive about listing just what is inside the box. When you purchase a computer/laptop there is almost always a description that informs you, in some measure of detail, exactly what parts it has inside - make, model, type, and speed of the CPU, memory, storage, I/O, MTBF, etc. Those specs give you a better idea of how much you should be paying, what kind of performance to expect, how long till the devices EOL, and what sort of processing and storage it may be capable of down the road.

 

Generally speaking, although few/none of them do, it is also a good thing when modeler manufacturers list at least the more vital core components and specifications in their modelers such as the DSPs used, capacity and speed of memory/storage, signal processing latency at the inputs and outputs when used for playing or recording, etc.. For many devices you have absolutely no idea how many presets, IRs, minimization of latency, degree of algorithm complexity, or often even the potential max number and types of effects in a path the device may ultimately be able to deliver. Although you can hope for more/better in a subsequent firmware update, you have to, as has often been stressed on this forum, go strictly by what info you have at the time of purchase.

 

Definitely not trying to imply anything nefarious going on here but it feels like modeling companies have largely gotten a free pass on full disclosure on their hardware. Many musicians didn't used to have expertise in that area or flat out don't care as long as it sounds good. Due to the subjective nature of sound there is something to be said for not getting into a DSP measuring contest, if it sounds good to you that may just be enough and specs can become meaningless. 

 

There is room for additional visibility as to exactly what is inside the box when it comes to comparing tech and pricing across multiple devices and manufacturers or even just to assist the ambitious DIYer.  More emphasis on hardware components may eventually lead to modelers which are designed to be expandable from the ground up to allow users to update and enhance their functionality, according to their personal requirements, with component swaps rather than buying an entirely new device. Much like you can do now with a computer by throwing a new motherboard, graphics or sound card, faster types of additional memory/storage, or a faster CPU into it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, HonestOpinion said:

 

LOL, I hear you and that HD500 review was definitely not one of his better moments. I know a lot of people take exception to his reviews, I have seen many a scathing rebuke of him. However he is one of the only reviewers actually deconstructing these devices in such depth. I find his reviews a useful resource for taking a look into the guts of devices I have no intention of taking apart myself.

 

His conclusions on the other hand have frequently been controversial as he seems to heavily weight the overall worth of a device from a component/hardware oriented perspective, sometimes unaware or mistaken about some of some of the device's other features and software or firmware attributes or the fact that it doesn't necessarily need the latest and greatest chip to be worthwhile or even great. Literally that the whole can be greater than the sum of the parts. I know he has skewered some devices I am rather fond of but I still thinks he makes some valuable contributions to the range of reviews available on any given device. Reviews that run the gamut from fawning salesmen to unabashed trolls.

 

Ultimately I am a fan of reviews that take a look at the component level in devices as I find them interesting and I believe they help, if only marginally, to keep manufacturers honest about recycling old technology into newer devices. Not necessarily a practice that condemns the device to inferiority but certainly not a practice conducive to future-proofing either.  Some mighty shiny devices that look great on the outside can house some fairly dated technology within. Like most reviews I take his with a grain of salt and weigh them against other opinions, including my own.

 

Note: His review on the Helix was overall positive and quite reassuring as to the quality of the components used.


Yeah, I guess he is actually full of good intentions and he is entitled to his opinions - it could be the way he chooses to deliver them - YouTube videos. That would leave anyone open to derision and ridicule - e.g him being referred to as “chucklehead” during the famous Fractal debacle.


He strikes me as the sort of guy with far too much money and time on his hands, who has decided the internet could make him the star that he believes he is. Good luck to him if he is in the situation where he can buy this stuff and dissect it on video. It’s just that he doesn’t really give me the impression that he genuinely knows what he is taking about, but hey!

 

Anyhow, I must congratulate you on being, possibly, the only one to endure one of his videos in full. Maybe his positive review of the Helix was in recompense for his previous trashing of a Line 6 product. I did note that his scathing 4 part video on the HD500 is now deleted apart from the first episode. On his website he says it attracted far too much hate mail. Mmm… video star - be careful what you wish for Mr. McKenzie 

 

4 hours ago, HonestOpinion said:

Much like you can do now with a computer by throwing a new motherboard, graphics or sound card, faster types of additional memory/storage, or a faster CPU into it.

 

Ah! The Helix equivalent of the Hackintosh.

 

I can hardly wait.   ;-)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, HonestOpinion said:

To state the obvious, in many respects current modelers are a computer specialized to generate and process sound. Although modelers have in common the identical goal of emulating amps and effects and often providing a recording interface, where they differ from computers is the higher degree of specialization in the UI, firmware, and software that sit on top of the hardware. These can vary wildly from one manufacturer to another and seem, to some extent, have lent license to companies not being particularly forthcoming about the hardware that underlies them. You don't just slap the identical version of Microsoft or Mac OS and Office onto every single modeler. There is no comprehensive benchmarking application for modelers. Not having an identical yardstick applied to all hardware makes it less compulsory to provide hardware details that make it easier to predict how different hardware platforms will perform . In many respects this is a good thing as hardware is hardly the sole factor in providing the mojo that makes for a great modeler. Protecting intellectual property probably plays a role here as well.

 

Although modeler manufacturers tout certain specs they are particularly proud of, often they are not very comprehensive about listing just what is inside the box. When you purchase a computer/laptop there is almost always a description that informs you, in some measure of detail, exactly what parts it has inside - make, model, type, and speed of the CPU, memory, storage, I/O, MTBF, etc. Those specs give you a better idea of how much you should be paying, what kind of performance to expect, how long till the devices EOL, and what sort of processing and storage it may be capable of down the road.

 

Ok... but a laptop might be called upon to do any one of 10,000 very different tasks, the success or failure of which might really be dependent on genuinely knowing what's under the hood so that you don't find yourself in a "you can't get there from here" scenario...but a modeler either does the one thing it's designed to do, and do it well, or it doesn't. And the assessment of said performance is almost entirely subjective and directly related to an individual's personal experience with these kinds of tools.

 

In the end, I fail to see how a reading a spec sheet beforehand will aid in the above determination one way or the other, for one simple reason:

 

I'm no dummy, but I'm also not tech savvy on a super granular, component level, either... you could almost tell me that Helix's innards consist of a really smart hamster named Lou, who manually implements whatever changes I make in real time on a tiny laptop, and I'd be hard-pressed to disagree. Similarly, you could rattle off the name(s) of the latest and greatest processing chips, and it wouldn't mean any more or less to me than if you called them Fred and Ethel... and I know I'm not alone in this regard. So it's not hard to understand why they don't bother to publish the majority of those specs...Joe Average neither knows nor cares, and for the minority who do, some are bound to whine loudly and publicly (just like Captain Video, above) about anything they've judged to be substandard. So if you're Line 6, what's the upside?

 

The only question I need answered is "will 'Device X' serve my needs, or not?"... and I can't get that from a spec sheet. There's exactly one way to find out. Just my 2 cents. 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, cruisinon2 said:

 

I'm no dummy, but I'm not tech savvy on a super granular, component level... you could almost tell me that Helix's innards consist of a really smart hamster named Lou, who manually implements whatever changes I make in real time on a tiny laptop, and I'd be hard-pressed to disagree. Similarly, you could rattle off the name(s) of the latest and greatest processing chips, and it wouldn't mean any more or less to me than if you called them Fred and Ethel... and I know I'm not alone in this regard. So it's not hard to understand why they don't bother to publish the majority of those specs...Joe Average neither knows nor cares, and for those who do, they're running the risk of having them whine publicly (just like Captain Video, above) about anything they've judged to be substandard. So if you're Line 6, what's the upside?


I think the only thing good about not publicizing those kind of technical details is it would give users the opportunity to bash or promote one modeler over another based on technical trivia they have no clue about.  I often find it hilarious when users that struggle to understand the concepts involved with building signal chains or the use of snapshots and presets, or how to route different signals in and out of the Helix get fixated on the one thing that even highly technical trained engineers sometimes don't completely understand.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DunedinDragon said:


I think the only thing good about not publicizing those kind of technical details is it would give users the opportunity to bash or promote one modeler over another based on technical trivia they have no clue about.  I often find it hilarious when users that struggle to understand the concepts involved with building signal chains or the use of snapshots and presets, or how to route different signals in and out of the Helix get fixated on the one thing that even highly technical trained engineers sometimes don't completely understand.

 

Exactly my point. I could care less if one chip has 11 extra phemtobytes (or whatever esoteric units in which one wishes to measure) of DSP.

 

Does it do what I need it to do?  Does it sound good? If the answer to those questions is "yes", great. Sold. If not, moving on...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, DunedinDragon said:

I often find it hilarious when users that struggle to understand the concepts involved with building signal chains or the use of snapshots and presets, or how to route different signals in and out of the Helix get fixated on the one thing that even highly technical trained engineers sometimes don't completely understand.

 

It's bad enough with the usual "update bricked my Helix" crowd, which should be regarded as a generally simple software installation.

Imaging the chaos that would ensue if you let people poke around the innards of the darn thing!
The tweakers and circuit benders will always attempt to do it anyway, and that's fine, but Joe Public - nah!

It would be like giving a monkey a loaded gun - and who would be cleaning up afterwards?

 

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...and then there is the EULA we agree to when we open the box, bag and use the device...pretty clear that direct or indirect reverse engineering is something we agreed NOT to persue.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, datacommando said:

 

It's bad enough with the usual "update bricked my Helix" crowd, which should be regarded as a generally simple software installation.

Imaging the chaos that would ensue if you let people poke around the innards of the darn thing!
The tweakers and circuit benders will always attempt to do it anyway, and that's fine, but Joe Public - nah!

It would be like giving a monkey a loaded gun - and who would be cleaning up afterwards?

 

 

Undeniable! I am shuddering even now at the mere contemplation of the potential torrent of posts that would ensue concerning bent pins, incorrectly seated RAM, and the insertion of incompatible hardware. However, somehow the PC industry managed to pull it off and I think it could work in the modeling world as well. I would be shocked if some intrepid manufacturer does not at least attempt it at some point. Maybe one without a forum... or a warranty :-)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spaceatl said:

...and then there is the EULA we agree to when we open the box, bag and use the device...pretty clear that direct or indirect reverse engineering is something we agreed NOT to persue.

 

True but wouldn't that apply more to not profiting by putting out a competing product based on the one you reverse engineered? Does the EULA expressly forbid tinkering for your own fun and folly?  Maybe it does to some extent just to indemnify the company from things like accidental electrocution or setting the thing on fire. In that case intended more to prevent a lawsuit against the company than to provide an opportunity to sue the consumer. The EULA doesn't forbid part swapping as far as I know in products like PCs, that are expressly designed to be upgraded. Guess you have to read the fine print. You will in many cases however void your warranty and perhaps create a very expensive doorstop.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HonestOpinion said:

Does the EULA expressly forbid tinkering for your own fun and folly?

 

It shouldn't, but unfortunately I think the answer to that is sometimes "yes"... Google the "right to repair" legislation, and you can read for days (and probably become alarmed) about what you can and can't legally do to things that you've paid good money for, and own outright.

 

As far as I'm concerned, if I want to buy 100 Helixes (Helices?) and fill them with maple syrup, I should be able to do exactly that... but that's not necessarily the world we live in.

 

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, cruisinon2 said:

Google the "right to repair"


I just did, and rather than falling down the rabbit hole, I found this:

 

https://repair.eu/news/the-new-iphone-13-comes-with-bad-news-for-third-party-repairs/

 

Apple has decided to stop people replacing a damaged screen, even if it is a genuine Apple part, by having the iPhone detect if it is being installed by an Apple authorised repairer. If not it will switch off Face ID.

 

Mmm… interesting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, cruisinon2 said:

 

It shouldn't, but unfortunately I think the answer to that is sometimes "yes"... Google the "right to repair" legislation, and you can read for days (and probably become alarmed) about what you can and can't legally do to things that you've paid good money for, and own outright.

 

As far as I'm concerned, if I want to buy 100 Helixes (Helices?) and fill them with maple syrup, I should be able to do exactly that... but that's not necessarily the world we live in.

 

 

Thanks for the reference to "right to repair". I was wholly unfamiliar with it. Some really interesting reading on the subject out there. Lobbyists and lawyers can end up spending a lot of their corporate client's money lobbying on K Street and trying to craft contracts that bulletproof their EULA agreements to indemnify themselves and avoid culpability as well as discourage theft of intellectual property. These agreements can also help to protect consumers from themselves and better ensure ongoing and safe operation of purchased items. Perfectly understandable for the company in the interest of avoiding a frivolous lawsuit or a tragedy. Not so much when it is a legitimate case of corporate negligence or error, although there are laws in place to help hold companies accountable in those cases. Sometimes they protect the consumer but we all know how that can end up working out in the real world though when your rumpled suited, mail order degree lawyer is sitting opposite a top tier corporate law firm. It might or might not help if we were not such a litigious country in getting a more rational compromise hammered out between corporations and consumers.

 

The other side of this though is just greed and profit motive. Sure, there are individuals who make their living off of "slipping" in the lobby and have a dozen outstanding lawsuits going at any one time against any company or individual unfortunate enough to come into their orbit. From my limited reading on the subject though, there definitely also appear to be areas where companies are using the legislatures to pass laws that allow them to unfairly monopolize or increase repair revenue or compel a new purchase by charging unreasonable prices for out-of-warranty repairs and essentially forcing a new purchase as the only sensible cost-effective option, rather than a repair. To be fair though, we live in a throwaway cultural and technological paradigm where often it is cheaper to buy new than the bottom-line economics of repairing an item, regardless of well-intentioned efforts by the company to restrain repair costs.

 

I have personally experienced the frustration and difficulty of trying to procure a service manual or a part when not being an authorized repairman but this issue extends far beyond that. Third party repair centers with legitimate credentials but unanointed by corporate HQ, apparently have also had difficulty getting service manuals, parts, firmware, etc. from a variety of companies as well as sometimes being legally prohibited from performing service without the corporation's permission. It does make sense to me to deny the DIYer access to repair information on some items that pose a serious risk of fire or electrocution but I admit to always finding it frustrating to be denied access to critical repair information nonetheless. Not sure how much safer it makes consumers either. Consumers who are inclined to attempt a repair themselves may decide to wing it, which can be considerably more hazardous than operating with a manual with appropriate warnings and correct procedures. Limiting access to service info may also be more ineffective these days when a lot of those same service manuals are for sale now on various third party sites. Probably operating outside borders where they could be prosecuted or perhaps sometimes serving as a source of publishing revenue for companies but limiting their legal exposure?

 

From my cursory reading on the subject so far though I can definitely see where there is a need, particularly in the best interests of the end user, to find some more rational middle ground. The laws governing this issue appear also to vary widely by state/country.

 

Gonna read up some more on this. These are just my initial impressions.  It is easy to see the complexities and challenges involved on both sides of the issue - corporate and consumer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, datacommando said:


I just did, and rather than falling down the rabbit hole, I found this:

 

https://repair.eu/news/the-new-iphone-13-comes-with-bad-news-for-third-party-repairs/

 

Apple has decided to stop people replacing a damaged screen, even if it is a genuine Apple part, by having the iPhone detect if it is being installed by an Apple authorised repairer. If not it will switch off Face ID.

 

Mmm… interesting!

 

This is terrible for consumers and third party repair centers as the article notes! It generally costs so much more to get a phone repaired by Apple, at least out of warranty. I suspect this will be justified by Apple citing enhanced security. Even if it does legitimately enhance security it will also drive increased out-of-warranty repair revenue for Apple and probably much more significantly, AppleCare plan revenue. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, HonestOpinion said:

From my cursory reading on the subject so far though I can definitely see where there is a need, particularly in the best interests of the end user, to find some more rational middle ground. The laws governing this issue appear also to vary widely by state/country.

 

It is easy to see the complexities and challenges involved on both sides of the issue - corporate and consumer.

 

I can sum it up in for you:

 

The companies are not concerned with consumers' best interests. The lawyers are not concerned with the consumers' best interests. And the politicians sure as $hit are not concerned with the consumers' best interests. Yet these are the three entities that will argue amongst themselves, grease each other's palms, and ultimately decide how the cookie crumbles for the rest of us serfs...you do the math.

 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, HonestOpinion said:

I suspect this will be justified by Apple citing enhanced security...

 

Of course. That's now the default justification for any and all instances where the rights of the electorate are trod upon, the endless expansion of the surveillance state, etc etc etc. "Pay no attention, there's nothing to see here... this is all about your safety. Now shut up and obey."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2021 at 6:07 PM, cruisinon2 said:

 

Of course. That's now the default justification for any and all instances where the rights of the electorate are trod upon, the endless expansion of the surveillance state, etc etc etc. "Pay no attention, there's nothing to see here... this is all about your safety. Now shut up and obey."

 

That is why I believe we need to adopt a model where every consumer owns their own personal data. You and only you should get to designate how and by whom it can be used, and receive commensurate royalties, goods, and/or services in return when you do allow its use. Resale of your data to(currently mostly unspecified) third parties should be strictly prohibited without your express knowledge and permission. And let's get rid of these blanket, vague, legalese, fifty page user agreements in microscopic print which you are forced to sign to use almost any app or service that allow sale and resale of your data to anyone and everyone.

 

I think Europe is heading more in this direction but the U.S. appears to be far behind on privacy concerns and way ahead on the wholesale commodification of personal data. Some of it for some very unsavory purposes that do consumers great harm (including purchase by outright criminal enterprises). Simple example, nothing criminal here, just business as usual - There is nothing necessarily stopping your health insurance company from buying access to the data history on your fitness watch and adjusting your health insurance rates accordingly; your car insurance company from using your Google Maps or Waze data to determine your driving habits and apply them to your vehicle insurance rates. You should have the right to make an informed decision about how your data will be used, and if you agree, be fairly compensated. The sad thing is those are examples of some of the more innocuous potential uses of "personal" data. They get a lot worse.

 

There is a whole new generation now that has been born into this model and is ignorant of the value and incredible revenues their personal data generates. Something I believe they are entitled to a piece of the action on. Younger folk increasingly place less and less of a premium on privacy and no longer even expect it, just as they have been conditioned to, even though it is a highly valuable commodity. It can be considered legal tender in the information age. Legality and fairness have yet to catch up with the technology. 

 

Apologies to the OP for veering a bit far afield and probably off topic. Off to the lounge with me(who am I kidding? I'm never in the lounge).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/19/2021 at 2:40 PM, HonestOpinion said:

 

True but wouldn't that apply more to not profiting by putting out a competing product based on the one you reverse engineered? Does the EULA expressly forbid tinkering for your own fun and folly?  Maybe it does to some extent just to indemnify the company from things like accidental electrocution or setting the thing on fire. In that case intended more to prevent a lawsuit against the company than to provide an opportunity to sue the consumer. The EULA doesn't forbid part swapping as far as I know in products like PCs, that are expressly designed to be upgraded. Guess you have to read the fine print. You will in many cases however void your warranty and perhaps create a very expensive doorstop.

 

Really need to take the time to read this stuff....Remember what happened to Kyle when he didn't read the Apple EULA and got his mouth sewn to someone's a$$?... :-)

 

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, spaceatl said:

 

Really need to take the time to read this stuff....Remember what happened to Kyle when he didn't read the Apple EULA and got his mouth sewn to someone's a$$?... :-)

 

 

 

Don't remember that episode but then I didn't see the "Human Centipede" film either. Point well taken though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...