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

Keep Android Open

keepandroidopen.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 907 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#51

Post by willtemperley »

codedokode wrote: post #29

Before buying a smartphone I tried to find an inexpensive model that supports open source OS, but I couldn't. What open OS support is ether expensive Pixels, or outdated models. The solution, I think, would be a regulation that forbids manufacturers of any chip or device CPU from making obstacles to reprogramming the device (using fuses, digital signatures, encryption etc). So if you buy a device with CPU and writabl…

Looks like GrapheneOS will be available on another "major Android OEM” soon [1].

Regulation should prevent Google from subsidising manufacturers to use Android. Arguably the recent antitrust legislation [2] applies in this case because they're effectively paying manufacturers to place that horrendous and impossible to remove search bar on the home screen.

[1] https://www.androidauthority.com/graphene-os-major-android-o... [2] https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-wins-signi...

Re: Keep Android Open

#52

Post by charcircuit »

neilv wrote: post #7

No matter how this turns out, I'm sure GrapheneOS will make a smart effort. https://grapheneos.org/ But long-term, Android is such a massive code base, and was designed more for surveillance and consumption, than for privacy&security and the user's interests. I think getting mainline Linux on viable and sustainable on multiple hardware devices is warmer, fuzzier foundation. (Sort of a cross between Purism's work on t…

>than for privacy&security and the user's interests.

Even if that was true, AOSP is better for privacy and security than any other Linux distro.

Re: Keep Android Open

#53

Post by lern_too_spel »

anonym29 wrote: post #2

I've got my Linux smartphone running and ready to go. VWYF, folks. I'll take shitty software and poor battery life over digital authoritarianism every single time. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

You can still run an Android build that doesn't require a Google signature for apps. You'll just lose access to Play Integrity APIs, which you wouldn't get from non-Android Linux phones either. A better technical solution is to set up a federated replacement for Play Integrity that third party ROM developers can opt into and a library that can use that or Play Integrity for app developers that want it to use.

Re: Keep Android Open

#54

Post by xyzal »

maxloh wrote: post #46
codedokode wrote: post #29

Before buying a smartphone I tried to find an inexpensive model that supports open source OS, but I couldn't. What open OS support is ether expensive Pixels, or outdated models. The solution, I think, would be a regulation that forbids manufacturers of any chip or device CPU from making obstacles to reprogramming the device (using fuses, digital signatures, encryption etc). So if you buy a device with CPU and writabl…

Most vendors (at some level) allow flashing custom distributions, as long as you didn't buy that device from carrier: https://github.com/zenfyrdev/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame... You will lose DRM-based apps (e.g. Netflix), Payment apps, and bank apps though.

Not in markets without significant Huawei and Xiaomi presence. Local banks (Czech Republic) are not using integrity APIs to keep being usable for most clients.

Re: Keep Android Open

#55

Post by jrflowers »

anonym29 wrote: post #2

I've got my Linux smartphone running and ready to go. VWYF, folks. I'll take shitty software and poor battery life over digital authoritarianism every single time. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

>VWYF, folks

Volkswagen Your Face

Vincent Wants Yummy Fries

Viewing Worked Yesterday, Frank

Voyeur Whom You Fuck

Veiled Widows You Fancy

Vore Website? Yes, Free!

Re: Keep Android Open

#56

Post by deanc »

EDIT: apologies I misunderstood that this is limiting third-party distribution. I am of course, in favour of this.

Original comment:

I don't want this. The App Store on iOS has its flaws, but it's a curated system that has a lot of checks in place to prevent malware. I have never felt unsafe on iOS and it's the primary reason I've not joined Android and the Play Store's wild west.

Re: Keep Android Open

#57

Post by ghm2180 »

Given the apple v epic ruling about in payment commision outside the app store, I don't understand this. I assume Google would get the same ruling if they tried what apple did, so why bother with walling off if you can't get paid?

At least with 3p app stores they could have Gpay if the app developer wanted to, but now they will be pissed and can't build a 3p app anyway since users can't install it via 3p app stores.

Re: Keep Android Open

#58

Post by jeena »

Back in the 2007 or when it came out in Sweden I bought the iPhone and started developing for it. This was cool, new and exciting and it was fine as long as my company was paying the $100 fee every year. But then I switched jobs and worked at a company which produced mostly open source code. Suddenly I would have to pay $100 every year just to be able to put my own software on the phone ...

This is why I switched to Android, just for Google now to pull the rug from under my feet again ...

Re: Keep Android Open

#59

Post by franczesko »

deanc wrote: post #56

EDIT: apologies I misunderstood that this is limiting third-party distribution. I am of course, in favour of this. Original comment: I don't want this. The App Store on iOS has its flaws, but it's a curated system that has a lot of checks in place to prevent malware. I have never felt unsafe on iOS and it's the primary reason I've not joined Android and the Play Store's wild west.

What this has to do with the topic, if you're on iOS?

Re: Keep Android Open

#60

Post by adithyassekhar »

deanc wrote: post #56

EDIT: apologies I misunderstood that this is limiting third-party distribution. I am of course, in favour of this. Original comment: I don't want this. The App Store on iOS has its flaws, but it's a curated system that has a lot of checks in place to prevent malware. I have never felt unsafe on iOS and it's the primary reason I've not joined Android and the Play Store's wild west.

I can't emphasize this enough, your comment is 100% wrong.

This is about only allowing play verified apps. Play store will remain whatever you think of it regardless of this move.

Post reply on HN