>Snap clearly has a philosophy. And a lot of people clearly disagree with that philosophy.
Seems like that philosophy is the user is not to be trusted. The problem here is that users in reality, not just philosophically, CANNOT trust snap because it will force updates (or dns trickery to stop it) that may cause a system to stop working.
But I think the goals might also be mutually exclusive.
Snap's philosophy, from what I read in the thread, boils down to: if an update bricks devices when it's pushed, the proper time to catch that update is before it's pushed, or as it's pushed, not after.
Which I do see the wisdom in. The majority of users are less well informed and equiped to test and patch than developers.
