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

481–490 of 907 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#481

Post by 999900000999 »

khimaros wrote: post #19
999900000999 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which brand do you suggest ? Google wants my apartment lease to let me distribute free games, so I just won't support their platform. This is not about security, it's about control.

i've had a positive experience with OnePlus 6 and Mobian, but if you want something more modern with a business behind it, check out https://furilabs.com/

This looks kind of cool, but it lacks a headphone jack...

Which you think would be the first thing you'd put on there since Bluetooth pairing is extremely difficult to get right when you're using custom operating systems.

Re: Keep Android Open

#482

Post by yard2010 »

jammo wrote: post #249
jeena wrote: post #58

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…

I can see why they add the fee, but they would both garner so much goodwill by giving free accounts if the app you publish is open source. I don't think it would be that hard to automate by requiring a GitHub link.

Those days are over. Being evil means there is no goodwill to begin with unless you can exploit it financially wise. Google stopped being not evil, they specifically deleted it from the code of conduct.

Ofc, being evil is subjective. But also this is the first excuse of evil players!

Re: Keep Android Open

#483

Post by pietro72ohboy »

luisml77 wrote: post #477

The discussion between open-source and closed-source is essentially a discussion between communism and capitalism. Anything that reaches a certain threshold of value to society and requires enormous effort to build and maintain has to fall back to a capitalist, for-profit, closed-source structure. That's all that's happening here. Of course, small stuff like a software library that doesn't require much effort to buil…

> I personally think this obsession with open-source software is simply an obsession with communism and getting things for free, and not wanting getting rewarded for the value of the stuff you build, etc.

Except that both platforms (iOS as well as Android) were either born out of OSS or are still reliant on active development in such projects. They created nothing, they took something from the commons, polished it and are now rent-seeking. It was tolerated till they threatened to choke all competition and trap and rent-seek the entire world with their duopoly.

Re: Keep Android Open

#484

Post by smaudet »

tonyhart7 wrote: post #440
ulrikrasmussen wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately western governments are moving to impose more and more control over our digital life, and I think they see a locked down commercial platform as a convenient means to that end because they can regulate it. If the EU commission ever succeeds in passing Chat Control, which requires client side scanning on all devices, then it is very convenient for them if people do not use open source operating systems wh…

right, government literally side with them if any open hardware/platform is impossible if they mandate all chat is exported to gov anyway

some governments, especially autocratic or authoritarian.

Even govts that may be in some political climates authoritarian can and will want exceptions to this.

There is no world that I see where decisions being made by Google are a good or reasonable choice for all parties, even ones you might think would side with this decision.

Remember, this give Google more control than an authoritarian govt. Sure, there may be a cost of doing business with some countries, however, even in those cases, this is bad for them - Google can just say "sucks to suck" and they either must use their product or develop their own, but if they use their product, *Google still has more control over that authoritarian govt than the people in it*

Put simply, now, Google Is Evil.

Re: Keep Android Open

#485

Post by Capricorn2481 »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #460
candiddevmike wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think their bank "isn't even trying to be secure"?

Because SMS is not considered a secure 2FA mechanism anymore, and hasn't been for a while. If that's the default for that bank, and not GP going out of their way to pick a legacy access path, then they're about a decade behind what's considered industry standard -- which today is querying a second factor not just per login, but also per important operations (money transfers, dispositions, changes in settings), with t…

I haven't heard a compelling reason why remote attestation is more secure.

The whole point of 2FA was to have two devices that you own. Now the bank is forcing your login and 2FA to be on the same device. Which is the easiest device to steal.

What about SMS is somehow worse than that?

Re: Keep Android Open

#486

Post by dagurp »

shaneqful wrote: post #458
liendolucas wrote: post #283

I'm going to say something that probably will get me down votes: Why do we have to beg Google to keep Android open? Seriously. So many open source projects have risen out of real and concrete needs and successfully made their way into our every day lives. A new platform needs to rise that breaks out completely from Google. I've given PostmarketOS a go (with a PinePhone) and while today I can't say it isn't a daily dr…

I used to have a Jolla phone which ran a pretty cool linux OS on it but it only worked because it had an alien dalvik android vm so I could still run apps like those from my bank, whatsapp etc.. It's nearly impossible to live in the modern world without either an iphone or android without making some major sacrifices e.g. I'd love to not use whatsapp but it's not an option because all of my friends and family use it

Why did you stop using it? Asking because I was wondering if I should get one.

Re: Keep Android Open

#487

Post by zb3 »

kevincox wrote: post #237
willtemperley wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

GrapheneOS is in some ways not an open OS. The official builds don't provide root access. So for example apps are able to hold your data hostage from you. I get that this is in the name of security hardening. And you can make a build that has limited root access and is officially supported. But GrapheneOS isn't the end-all solution to computing freedom. Although hopefully on those devices you will be able to install…

Raw root access isn't what I'd want apps to have.. it's that the Android permission system deliberately limits what the user can consent to, the rest is for "system apps" and to install those you need to unlock bootloader and start the whole "journey" while saying goodbye to banking apps.

Implementing a more flexible permission model + sandbox would probably involve too much work for them.

Hopefully AVF might make things a little better if we'd be able to run Android VMs on Android - so you'd be able to run a rooted VM inside GrapheneOS.. but this depends on Google keeping Android open source, yet QPR1 was not released.

Re: Keep Android Open

#488

Post by fluidcruft »

Zambyte wrote: post #310
sjamaan wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I can't root or otherwise customize my OS on my device because Linux is not GPLv3.

Correct. And the reason GPLv3 exists is because TiVo did the same thing eons ago.

Re: Keep Android Open

#489

Post by thomastjeffery »

liendolucas wrote: post #283

I'm going to say something that probably will get me down votes: Why do we have to beg Google to keep Android open? Seriously. So many open source projects have risen out of real and concrete needs and successfully made their way into our every day lives. A new platform needs to rise that breaks out completely from Google. I've given PostmarketOS a go (with a PinePhone) and while today I can't say it isn't a daily dr…

Drivers and firmware blobs.

The real problem was never solved to begin with: all mobile devices require proprietary drivers to function at all. Because these drivers are proprietary, the only people in a position to make them compatible with an OS are the manufacturer's dev team; and they are only interested in compatibility with Google's proprietary Android fork.

When Google starts to release versions of its proprietary Android fork, any open Android fork (or other alternative OS) will have to reverse engineer that proprietary Android fork in order to match its compatibility with proprietary firmware blobs. This will need to be done for every device.

Imagine trying to find your way through a building while wearing a blindfold. It's much easier if you are able to study the original floor plan that building was modeled after, even if the building itself has a modified design. Google is taking away that floor plan.

The situation is already medium-bad: it would be trivial to use an alternative OS if drivers and firmware were open source. It would be relatively easy if drivers and firmware had open specifications. It's difficult, but feasible in the current situation, where drivers and firmware are closed spec, but designed to be compatible with a close fork of an open source codebase. It will be extremely difficult (and technically illegal in the US) to do when drivers and firmware are closed spec, and designed to be compatible with a closed source codebase.

Re: Keep Android Open

#490

Post by fyrecean »

luisml77 wrote: post #477

The discussion between open-source and closed-source is essentially a discussion between communism and capitalism. Anything that reaches a certain threshold of value to society and requires enormous effort to build and maintain has to fall back to a capitalist, for-profit, closed-source structure. That's all that's happening here. Of course, small stuff like a software library that doesn't require much effort to buil…

What about this is communism vs capitalism? Or even closed vs open source. There are billions of android devices in people's hands. Requiring a centralized authority to authorize what code people get to run on their own devices has nothing to do with a free market economy. This is a private entity telling us it's not safe to run code on our own computers without their approval.

Linux doesn't need a for profit company gate keeping it to ensure it is safe and secure. And even Windows doesn't prevent you from running any executable you choose from the internet. Why are phones treated differently?

Post reply on HN