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

271–280 of 907 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#271

Post by gf000 »

andrepd wrote: post #260
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an inexpensive model that supports open source OS, but I couldn't. What open OS support is ether expensive Pixels, or outdated models.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…

> 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an inexpensive model that supports open source OS, but I couldn't. What open OS support is ether expensive Pixels, or outdated models. You can buy a refurbished Pixel 5 for less than 200$. Great screen, great camera, 5G, the works. It's definitely not an "outdated" device, and it runs Graphene or Lineage with minimal hassle.

You can get a new Pixel 8 for ~500$, I would say that has a very decent price to value, and will be supported for longer.

Re: Keep Android Open

#272

Post by jhbadger »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #130
rafaelmn wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100$ a year for a dev in Sweden - that's like money you wouldn't notice if it got lost in your pockets - and I am sure it cuts down on spammers and covers administrative cost. I have no problem with a store having a small admission fee - that's perfectly reasonable and they do have operational costs. It would be nice if they had some way to waive the fee for popular OSS to garner some god will with the devs. Taking a…

> 100$ a year for a dev in Sweden - that's like money you wouldn't notice if it got lost in your pockets For someone who is making money from it, sure, but that's exactly who this isn't about. The way they get screwed is by the 30%. A fixed fee -- in any amount -- is screwing the people who aren't in it for the money. Because to begin with, it's not just the fee, it's the bureaucracy that comes with the fee. You're a…

>And suppose the amount is as trivial as you propose. Then why does a multi-trillion dollar conglomerate need that pittance from a million ordinary people?

Reminds me how in the 1970s and 1980s there used to be these ads in the back of magazines in which a person who supposedly became a millionaire sold pamphlets for $5 telling his secrets to success. The obvious question was why such a successful person would need $5 from poor people (unless that was one of his secrets to success, I suppose).

Re: Keep Android Open

#273

Post by Gud »

Narann wrote: post #196
Gud wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because we “allow nazis” doesn’t mean society will turn into an authoritarian dictatorship. People are not stupid.

In this case, it was precisely the act of "allow nazis" that led Google to its current situation. People aren't stupid, but the fact that Google is in this situation proves that we should have been less naive.

I don’t understand your point. It sounds like you think someone is making Google take unwanted actions.

Re: Keep Android Open

#274

Post by actionfromafar »

maybewhenthesun wrote: post #84
rezonant wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free provisioning: If you do not pay the developer fee an app installed via Xcode will work for 7 days. Afterwards the app on your phone will *stop working*, and you must open Xcode on your Mac again, and push a new build to your phone if you want to keep using it. Paid provisioning: If you have paid the developer fee, a build will expire based on the amount of time left before that payment renews, so if you build an…

We're stuck between two mafia families :-(

A.K.A. Digital Feudalism.

Re: Keep Android Open

#275

Post by thomc »

codedokode wrote: post #144
maxloh wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I wouldn't want the bank to access my phone, so it doesn't matter that the app doesn't work, and in a weird case where you urgently need to transfer your money to scammers while not being at home, you can use bank's web app.

There are at least a couple of banks or credit card companies in the UK now that only offer mobile apps, as well as those now using push MFA with their apps for every large purchase. Recently I needed to install an app from the UK government to prove my identity via camera to renew my driving license, and that doesn't work in GrapheneOS either. I can do it in person (for now) but there is an extra fee.

Re: Keep Android Open

#277

Post by safety1st »

VagabundoP wrote: post #227
safety1st wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the place where I think lawmakers needs to be involved. Bearing in mind that laws aren't engineering specs, being able to pay for things and use a bank are about as close to fundamental rights as anything is for participants in society. If you have to buy a second device to use Netflix, so be it, but we need laws that guarantee people can make digital payments without Apple or Google's permission. There are s…

Secure boot and OEM bootloader unlock should be able to work with images so you can lock a phone after the upgrade again. I managed to get a US refubished Pixel 2 somehow with a fuselocked bootloader here in Ireland. I bought it second hand but I've no idea how it got that way. But I'm suck on the Pixel image and I wanted to use it for ROM testing etc.

This is outside of my area of expertise. I know there are i.e. banking apps that will disable themselves if you're running some unofficial 3rd party Android derivative like LineageOS. Are you saying those apps would work again if you perform some kind of secure boot locking procedure?

Re: Keep Android Open

#278

Post by vbezhenar »

sjamaan wrote: post #235
pyeri wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This situation would have been avoided if we, as community of engineers, had insisted on full and uncompromised open source (Stallmanist or GPL way) right from the start instead of going the ESR way of half-hearted open source where it's technically open but corporates get to have a free lunch and make abuses. Like most coders, I also prefer the permissive MIT/Apache/BSD licensing for most software projects but incid…

GPL doesn't help you one bit in this particular situation, because "regular users" would still be using the locked-down stock Android that came with their device. So they still can't install your app. Anyone who is already running a rooted Android or otherwise customized OS isn't affected by this, only developers who want to distribute their app to users.

AFAIK GPLv3 requires to allow user to run modified software (so essentially device must be unlockable). Android is not GPLv3, unfortunately.

Re: Keep Android Open

#279

Post by actionfromafar »

rafaelmn wrote: post #189
4gotunameagain wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you even reading the comments you are replying to, or ? You need to pay $100 to execute code on a device that you own. Without a 7 day time limit. And only if you have the technical expertise to do so. This is not a fee for distribution/integration. This is feudal rent.

Are you reading what I am saying ? 100$ for distribution access on the store is reasonable. Side-loading prevention is shit. Both can be true at the same time.

Your position wasn't clear to me, at least.

Yes, a world where you can sideload an app on an iOS device, without time limits, but you have still pay $100 to put it on the app store, is a much less shittier world, indeed.

Re: Keep Android Open

#280

Post by sharas- »

Just installed Lineage OS 23 (androind 16) on my Motorola g84. Works like a charm. Banking apps work. Do I need to say fuck google? Like it's not obvious?
Post reply on HN