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

No user accounts, by design

f-droid.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 147 posts

Re: No user accounts, by design

#121

Post by iggldiggl »

mackrevinack wrote: post #107
staindk wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really a counter point because you mention a lot of other issues with f-droid that sound valid (I haven't used it myself) - but as a tangent regarding auto updates, I disable them basically everywhere because I seem to have buggy experiences too often if I allow stuff to update all the time. I then go through the list of updates in the Play Store once a week or so and install those that I think might improve app…

i got stung a few times and have turned off updates since. it wouldn't be such an issue if the play store would allow you to roll back to a previous version

Even if Android would let you easily downgrade apps, the problem remains that each individual app would also have to support that scenario, too (by never doing any data migration that would leave the user data no longer readable by the old app version).

Re: No user accounts, by design

#122

Post by hansel_der »

m1sta_ wrote: post #28
syrrim wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way mega.nz works is the sharable url contains a decryption key in the hash. The server only sees encrypted data, the client requests that data then decrypts it. This design ensures they have no ability to see user content, while still enabling users to share links on the web.

They still have the ability to see user content, but it would require them to make a change to their codebase. If they did such a change silently...

just like whatsapp encryption

Re: No user accounts, by design

#123

Post by fsflover »

charcircuit wrote: post #117
fsflover wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Purism had years to procure the CPUs they needed. Yes, Purism had their own delays. In my opinion, they had good reasons for those [0]. But today delays are due to the supply chain, not Purism. [0] https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...

>[0] They say the delays stem from their choice of SoC. They decided to use i.MX 8M in 2018. They had time to order the CPUs. >there were only two SoC's that Purism could use (i.MX 6 or i.MX 8M) that could run on 100% free software and fit within the power limitations of a phone This isn't true as it requires proprietary software for things such as doing memory training on boot. >But today delays are due to the suppl…

> This isn't true as it requires proprietary software for things such as doing memory training on boot.

https://puri.sm/posts/librem5-solving-the-first-fsf-ryf-hurd...

Re: No user accounts, by design

#124

Post by Leherenn »

pSYoniK wrote: post #96
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #30

F-droid gets many things right (e.g. verifiable builds), but it's just not usable in practice. Installing applications is a rare event, updating them is frequent, and needs to disrupt the user as little as possible. Android used to not allow alternative app stores to update apps without user interaction, but now supports this through UPDATE_PACKAGES_WITHOUT_USER_ACTION, which doesn't seem to be supported by F-droid.…

I have been using F-Droid for about 2 years now as the main source for the few apps that I use and updates are coming through without interaction. Bitwarden/Aegis/Tutanota/Syncthing/K-9 all receive regular updates as far as I've experienced during this time. I also haven't had issues with update flow. When was the last time you used F-Droid for a prolonged period of time?

I have the same issue fwiw. A notification to update NewPipe that always fail to install the update, but it works if you do it manually in the app. Just happened a couple of hours ago.

Re: No user accounts, by design

#125

Post by lucb1e »

d0gsg0w00f wrote: post #75
lucb1e wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The edits aren't really anonymous if they publicly [show your IP] Counter-example: stackoverflow is also reasonably big and allows anonymous questions, answers, and even edits, without publishing an IP address or anything. The edits end up in a review queue, the rest I think is actually published immediately.

But doesn't this content need to be reviewed (read permitted) by other non-anon user accounts?

> The edits end up in a review queue, the rest I think is actually published immediately.

Re: No user accounts, by design

#126

Post by charcircuit »

fsflover wrote: post #123
charcircuit wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>[0] They say the delays stem from their choice of SoC. They decided to use i.MX 8M in 2018. They had time to order the CPUs. >there were only two SoC's that Purism could use (i.MX 6 or i.MX 8M) that could run on 100% free software and fit within the power limitations of a phone This isn't true as it requires proprietary software for things such as doing memory training on boot. >But today delays are due to the suppl…

> This isn't true as it requires proprietary software for things such as doing memory training on boot. https://puri.sm/posts/librem5-solving-the-first-fsf-ryf-hurd...

In the article they describe how they are running the proprietary memory training software on the M4 core in the i.MX 8 chip.

Running proprietary code on the i.MX 8 chip means that it is not 100% running on free software.

Re: No user accounts, by design

#127

Post by charcircuit »

hansel_der wrote: post #120
charcircuit wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>[0] They say the delays stem from their choice of SoC. They decided to use i.MX 8M in 2018. They had time to order the CPUs. >there were only two SoC's that Purism could use (i.MX 6 or i.MX 8M) that could run on 100% free software and fit within the power limitations of a phone This isn't true as it requires proprietary software for things such as doing memory training on boot. >But today delays are due to the suppl…

> Despite the uncertainty in the supply chain Purism continues to take orders even if it may not be possible to fulfill these orders. not taking new orders (and money) would be a very bad sign for investors, no?

The large backlog of orders is a big red flag for the product to investors. I don't think continuing to take money is as big of a signal. Having a big backlog means that competitors who can actually deliver a product are going to be making more sales. It's a giant competitive advantage to be able to buy a phone and receive it in a couple days compared to buying a phone and receiving it in a couple years. For the fast moving technology space of phones with every year phones get delayed the product's hardware will become more and more outdated making the competitors look better.

To me keeping the orders, doubling the price, and trying not to give out refunds makes me think Purism has serious money issues.

Re: No user accounts, by design

#128

Post by fsflover »

charcircuit wrote: post #126
fsflover wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This isn't true as it requires proprietary software for things such as doing memory training on boot. https://puri.sm/posts/librem5-solving-the-first-fsf-ryf-hurd...

In the article they describe how they are running the proprietary memory training software on the M4 core in the i.MX 8 chip. Running proprietary code on the i.MX 8 chip means that it is not 100% running on free software.

I'm no expert but probably yes. More details: https://source.puri.sm/Librem5/community-wiki/-/wikis/Freque...

It's however the most free phone as far as I know.

Re: No user accounts, by design

#129

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

staindk wrote: post #39
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #30

F-droid gets many things right (e.g. verifiable builds), but it's just not usable in practice. Installing applications is a rare event, updating them is frequent, and needs to disrupt the user as little as possible. Android used to not allow alternative app stores to update apps without user interaction, but now supports this through UPDATE_PACKAGES_WITHOUT_USER_ACTION, which doesn't seem to be supported by F-droid.…

Not really a counter point because you mention a lot of other issues with f-droid that sound valid (I haven't used it myself) - but as a tangent regarding auto updates, I disable them basically everywhere because I seem to have buggy experiences too often if I allow stuff to update all the time. I then go through the list of updates in the Play Store once a week or so and install those that I think might improve app…

Personally, I've found that disabling auto-updates just means either unnecessarily sticking with outdated/buggy versions (or versions that drift out of sync with backend services and acquire new bugs that way), or I spend way too much time manually maintaining my phone instead of actually using it.

I don't have time to read release notes/research each new version, so I'd likely just spend 10 minutes hitting "update" on everything, then getting bitten by the same issues.

(This is specifically in regards to Android apps, not other platforms).

Re: No user accounts, by design

#130

Post by mehdix »

freedomben wrote: post #86
staindk wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really a counter point because you mention a lot of other issues with f-droid that sound valid (I haven't used it myself) - but as a tangent regarding auto updates, I disable them basically everywhere because I seem to have buggy experiences too often if I allow stuff to update all the time. I then go through the list of updates in the Play Store once a week or so and install those that I think might improve app…

Yep, me too. I used to evangelize frequent updates because of the security aspect. However over time I kept getting burned by disruptive or buggy updates that broke things that I depend on. The last straw for me was a few years ago when my podcast suddenly stopped playing. When I unlocked the phone to investigate why the episode had stopped the UI had completely changed, in a way that I was completely lossed and had…

Exactly the same here. Nowadays I go through the changelog and often I realize there is no changelog for the update, or it is totally irrelevant for me (e.g. bug fixes for other android versions or problems which I don't have, marketing changes, cosmetic changes, features I don't need, etc.)
Post reply on HN