FSF announces Librephone project

Post by Arainach » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 4:43 AM UTC

lmm wrote: post #187

Arainach wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No software is "easy to inspect". Only a tiny fraction of users will ever even try. When things are inspected and problems are found, you need a way to revoke the malicious bits. You'll never notify everyone, which is one of the roles app stores play. You trust hardware and software by establishing boundaries. We figured this out long ago with the kernel mode/user mode privilege check and other things. You want apps…

> The banks - who are generally on the hook if something goes wrong, or at least have to pay a lot of lawyers to get off the hook - are not interested in moral arguments, they want a risk-reduced environment or no app for you - as is their right. If they pay for the phone and ship it to you then I agree. Otherwise, they have an obligation to serve their community (part of their banking charter) and that may include m…

Post by mike_d » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 4:45 AM UTC

jMyles wrote: post #132

criddell wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The time is right, but I still don’t think this project can accomplish much because people are generally happy with their phones. That said, the phone market is huge. They could sell enough devices to fund future development which might be good enough even if it doesn’t slow down Apple or Google. At least then there will be a device for those of us who are not happy with the state of things.

> The time is right, but I still don’t think this project can accomplish much because people are generally happy with their phones. Is there survey data available on this? Anecdotally, everybody I know hates their phones. In fact, I think if you asked, "what's the biggest pain point in your life right now?" I think most people will point to their phones.

Post by DonHopkins » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 4:48 AM UTC

userbinator wrote: post #90

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…

Indeed, binary blobs are not much of a problem; it's anti-user "security" that has to be attacked. Otherwise we'll end up with user-hostile systems that we can see the source code of but can't modify, in contrast to systems that we can't see the source code of but can modify. The Windows modding scene of the late 90s/early 2000s is a good example of the latter (and I've joked that every power user was a novice revers…

Post by lmm » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 4:50 AM UTC

koolala wrote: post #197

lmm wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the bank's policies. Currently it tends to be when you transfer to a new destination and/or above a certain amount. I could certainly imagine a bank requiring it for every PC-initiated transaction as and when they reach a point where most normie customers are using their app.

"Every PC-initiated transaction" doesn't make sense to me. What type are transactions are you talking about?

Post by lmm » Wed, Oct 15, 2025, 4:52 AM UTC

Arainach wrote: post #201

lmm wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The banks - who are generally on the hook if something goes wrong, or at least have to pay a lot of lawyers to get off the hook - are not interested in moral arguments, they want a risk-reduced environment or no app for you - as is their right. If they pay for the phone and ship it to you then I agree. Otherwise, they have an obligation to serve their community (part of their banking charter) and that may include m…

No charter requires allowing access from any device. The charters don't even require banks to be open during hours most of their customers are off work.