Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FSF announces Librephone project

fsf.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 669 posts

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#141

Post by kube-system »

tguvot wrote: post #137
kube-system wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't cbrs devices need to be part 96 certified? The spectrum might not be licensed but you still may need a certified device to legally use the spectrum. Which you could do, but that is a tall hill to climb for a FOSS enthusiast. And when you're done -- what network are you going to connect it to? A cheap SIM from the corner store is probably out of the question :)

looks like they need. but it still gives you more possibilities compared to usual spectrum. if there is enough coverage from SAS you (or FSF) can build your own cbrs network that will have open source modem/firmware (yet, still will have to comply with part96). there are also all kind of open source lte/cbrs projects iirc

It's a fun thought exercise, but putting "part 96 certification" at the end of my build pipeline sounds pretty expensive. And building a physical cell phone network is stupidly capital intensive. Maybe there are some interesting small scale niches that this would be useful for. But as a daily driver cell phone, I don't think we're ever gonna have an open source modem, at least not until there are significant changes to the spectrum that's in use.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#142

Post by gertop »

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #26
bsimpson wrote: post #11

Interesting that they chose Android as a base and not one of the desktop-Linux-for-mobile ports like postmarketOS.

It's an incredible waste and an amazing example of how useless the FSF is today. Instead of supporting real Linux phones they're focusing on trying to degunk Android even more.

> It's an incredible waste

Funny, I would have used those exact words had they chosen anything BUT Android as their base.

All the other "freedom" Linux phones are failures (yes I'm sure fsflover will now chime in to but akshually). I know because I bought them all. They all have one thing in common: the software sucks.

And I don't even need apps. Just basic phone functionality (several Linux phones still can't do MMS), a web browser, and no crashes. Unfortunately no Linux phone has been able to give the to me yet. Whereas Android has been delivering for over a decade.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#143

Post by kube-system »

jMyles wrote: post #133
kube-system wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the big barrier here, and unfortunately, it is legally impossible to open source. In most countries, the spectrum that cell phone carriers use is licensed to the carrier, under the condition they only connect devices that are guaranteed to comply with the requirements of using that spectrum. The end user (i.e. the person with the phone) has no license to use the spectrum. So in order to get regulatory certifi…

Hopefully open mesh wifi will supplant cell phone networks anyway.

Haven't there been projects trying to do this since 802.11b? I think the last time I looked one of these mash networks up, there wasn't even decent coverage in the dense city I lived in.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#144

Post by fuzzzerd »

mikestorrent wrote: post #135
scheeseman486 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This won't help if Google/Apple/Microsoft roll out integrity checks for browsers, something which they have already suggested they want to do.

It won't just be them. I foresee Cloudflare and other CDNs offering a free checkbox: [] Require age of majority verified user And it will in turn depend on Secure Attestation, Web Credentials, and other recent W3C work to provide proof that you're the registered owner, age of majority and verified by thumbprint or other biometrics, running an unmodified device. Your ID might be escrowed with your OS vendor, email pro…

That sounds awful.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#145

Post by thedumbname »

hedora wrote: post #106
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #4

Ultimately, I don't think the most important challenge is in binary firmware blobs, but the software which people depend upon to run their lives. What does it matter if you can run a completely free software stack on your phone, if your bank software (or your required government ID, as is looking depressingly likely) requires you to run a Big Tech approved phone OS? Perhaps the FSF can't do much about that, but that…

There is one solution to this problem that many people reading this message can contribute to: Make sure your app has a progressive web app version that has feature parity with the store apps. That way, the app will work on phones like the librephone, and, if Apple or Google decide to kick you off the store, you and your users have some recourse. As a bonus, it’s compatible with open source — users can modify the app…

You are mixed up 3 different tech stacks: 1. React Native has nothing in common with web apps except JS runtime. It uses "native" widgets for Android and iOS. You need to add a new "native" runtime for your free OS. There are some third-party attempts to add mac/win/linux support, but they are not feature complete as officially supported platforms. Again, your free OS will be step behind. 2. Yes, you can write PWA with React (Web), but PWA still have many missing features which offered by platform APIs of Android and iOS. Your app will not be in "feature parity" with "native" app. Especially banking app. 3. Electron apps are integrated with desktop platform APIs, you cannot easily port Electron app to mobile. Every time big company with big investments wins.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#146

Post by neilv »

> The FSF has been supporting earlier free software mobile phone projects such as Replicant,

Hopefully this project will go better than Replicant. Here are my notes on running Replicant on the (then already very old) flagship Samsung GT-I9300:

https://www.neilvandyke.org/replicant/

The hardware was a little difficult to obtain in the US, and WiFi worked only with a blob of questionable provenance.

It looks like Replicant has been stuck for several years, and they recognize that they need to find a new device, funding, etc.

(After Replicant, I spent some time on PostmarketOS with various devices, and then gave up and bought iPhones, and then got ticked off and moved to GrapheneOS.)

I wonder whether the FSF is already collaborating with Purism on this, to leverage their work on the Librem 5 and PureOS, which I believe the FSF is well aware of. If the FSF manages to muster a lot more open source volunteers on a more affordable hardware, but that work is also usable for Librem 5, then it could be a win-win. (And Purism also has something called Liberty Phone, which is a made-in-USA Librem 5 phone, so their lawyers should talk about trademarks in any case.)

https://puri.sm/products/librem-5/

https://puri.sm/products/liberty-phone/

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#147

Post by [deleted] »

hedora wrote: post #106
bigstrat2003 wrote: post #4

Ultimately, I don't think the most important challenge is in binary firmware blobs, but the software which people depend upon to run their lives. What does it matter if you can run a completely free software stack on your phone, if your bank software (or your required government ID, as is looking depressingly likely) requires you to run a Big Tech approved phone OS? Perhaps the FSF can't do much about that, but that…

There is one solution to this problem that many people reading this message can contribute to: Make sure your app has a progressive web app version that has feature parity with the store apps. That way, the app will work on phones like the librephone, and, if Apple or Google decide to kick you off the store, you and your users have some recourse. As a bonus, it’s compatible with open source — users can modify the app…

[deleted]

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#148

Post by bouncycastle »

kube-system wrote: post #110
ACCount37 wrote: post #15

Unfortunately, even if you could completely de-blob the kernel itself (and for many chipsets, that would require a considerable amount of reverse engineering work!), smartphones bear the Curse of the Modem. In a modern smartphone, modem is often a part of the SoC itself - and it runs some of the biggest and fattest blobs you've ever seen.

This is the big barrier here, and unfortunately, it is legally impossible to open source. In most countries, the spectrum that cell phone carriers use is licensed to the carrier, under the condition they only connect devices that are guaranteed to comply with the requirements of using that spectrum. The end user (i.e. the person with the phone) has no license to use the spectrum. So in order to get regulatory certifi…

this is the same thing with wifi. There are different channels and transmission power rules depending on country. Something you cannot change even if you are root or build your own kernel, as it's built in to the wifi hardware (eg. raspberry pi)

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#149

Post by kiratp »

hnuser123456 wrote: post #54
kovac wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is the right place to start. A free OS will empower developers to implement technical workarounds that could trick these apps into working there. If the OS is tightly controlled, we have no recourse. Even in the worst case scenario, we could use a cheap big-tech-approved phone for these applications (a glorified digital token) and use the free phone for everything else. When there's enough adoption and t…

And I feel like it undermines any effort to make free, featureful applications if the hardware itself can't be trusted.

Should the app builder’s ability to “trust” that the hardware will protect them from the user supersede the user’s ability to be able to trust that the hardware will protect them from the app?

In other words, should the device be responsible to enforcing DRM (and more) against its owner?

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#150

Post by tguvot »

kube-system wrote: post #141
tguvot wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

looks like they need. but it still gives you more possibilities compared to usual spectrum. if there is enough coverage from SAS you (or FSF) can build your own cbrs network that will have open source modem/firmware (yet, still will have to comply with part96). there are also all kind of open source lte/cbrs projects iirc

It's a fun thought exercise, but putting "part 96 certification" at the end of my build pipeline sounds pretty expensive. And building a physical cell phone network is stupidly capital intensive. Maybe there are some interesting small scale niches that this would be useful for. But as a daily driver cell phone, I don't think we're ever gonna have an open source modem, at least not until there are significant changes…

i didn't say that it's cheap. i said that it's possible.
Post reply on HN