Interesting observation. After a human is done writing code, they still have a memory of why they made the choices they made. With an LLM, the context window is severely limited compared to a brain, so this information is usually thrown away when the feature is done, and so you cannot go back and ask the LLM why something is the way it is.

Well, sure. But being free *from* a few bad things is rarely worth it when the price is giving up being free *to* do a lot of other good things.

I highly doubt that. Monopolies do not tend to develop what is best for consumers, but what is best for their bottom lines.

It also depends on the criteria on which you judge it. I may be better in terms of compatibility because everything would be an expensive walled garden like Apple's. It would be worse in terms of choice because niche peripheral makers might not be able to enter the market at all. And it would certainly, almost guaranteed, be much much worse in terms of personal freedom because no-one would be allowed to modify any parts of any piece of software without some cryptographic hardware module stopping them. Imagine that situation, and then imagine how a government would use that to impose surveillance on all personal computing devices.

I HATE this argument. If the PC had been locked down like smartphones are today, we would never have had Linux on the desktop.

Also, replace "consumers" by "people" who might need to control their devices to do things that may be against the interests of the manufacturer, like removing ads and surveillance.