>No, ownership over a device should be a human right

I'm really tired of the trend of people declaring whatever policy they want enacted as being "a human right". Yes, having control over the devices you own is something we should push for, but it's nowhere important to be called a human right.

As we’re starting to rely more and more on the technology, be for identification, information, etc I’d argue ownership should be a human right. It may not be necessarily essential today, but we’re heading in that direction

Eh, trusted computing isn't so much about trusting what's running on your machine but trusting that your machine runs other people's code without any pesky modifications. So I'd say being allowed to run more than government/Microsoft/Apple signed code is something to codify.

Lets "pretend" code is a form of speech.

The underlying sentiment is typically that humans should have the right to live in a comprehensible society that even a below-average person can successfully navigate. Technology threatens this, and it's not just the elderly who fall to the wayside. So while it may annoy you, it is not incorrect to posit that we may need new human rights to deal with this.

>I'm really tired of the trend of people declaring whatever policy they want enacted as being "a human right".

computing became inalienable from human rights when we as a society started asking everyone to conduct mandatory business using them.

paying your bills, gaining access to places, applying for welfare systems, creating doctors appointments, the list goes on -- the things that can be done alternatively over the phone or in-person dwindles as the years tick by.

If we don't claim that certain computing freedoms should be part-and-parcel of human rights then we must wait for the obvious and apparent abuse-of-system to occur and damage society before remediation -- I think we as a society may just have the wisdom to avoid that damage before it happens, but it requires advocacy.

I'm not doubting that computing devices are essential to daily life, but that doesn't really mean we should make it a "human right". If we're adopting that logic, we should also make smartphones (or similar personal computing devices) themselves a human right. After all, what good is control over a device if you don't own one in the first place? While we're at it, let's make cell plans a human right as well, because a smartphone wouldn't be very useful without internet access, and many sites demand a phone number for verification/2fa.

That does sound like a good idea if you put it like that, just not right now. Computers are still a really new field with lots of innovation going on. In the future we might take a government radio-ish approach. Cell (and cable) networks seem easier than roads and cheaper than water.

You’re arguing against the principle of private property. People should be allowed to own things. That’s the most fundamental right humans have. Tech and “innovations” in what counts as consent and an “agreement” have taken that away for most of our most important “purchases”

> while people who pirate enjoy BETTER experience

This is generally true of piracy, but hard to apply to Denuvo:

- in 2022, one Denuvo game was cracked

- you have to wait a long time

- the version cracked might not even be the latest version available at the time of cracking

- you have to deal with a transphobe

Genuinely curious if you also have this same energy towards Steam.