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

Keep Android Open

f-droid.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 764 posts

Re: Keep Android Open

#571

Post by edg5000 »

I want Google as an app, not OS. Hear me out. Imagine an open device where you can run Google as just another sandboxed app. Inside, they can exert all the control they want. My bank and government can force me to use Google.

Then, at least I control my hardware and my OS.

It's just nasty to have your device and OS controlled by an antagonistic entity.

I see this in people why have used antagonistic software for decades and have become zombified and shellshocked; the idea that software could be on your side is to alien to them. They hate software and technology and just want to get some work done. They tolerate the abuse because they can't fight Google alone; it's pointless to resist.

Re: Keep Android Open

#572

Post by palata »

fc417fc802 wrote: post #456
palata wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We really need to get past the 90s-minded paradigm of everything having access to everything else all the time I do agree with that, and I strongly believe that the iOS and Android security model is way ahead of Desktop Linux. But what I observe is that nobody seems to care about the security model. A recurrent complaint I see against anything AOSP-based (including Android) is that people "want to be root".

It's important to keep separate the parts of the security model mobile did well from the parts it got wrong. Declaring that app developers can decline end user access to app files is unacceptable. I get final say on my device. I get to run as root. Hell, I get to run as ring 0 if that's what I want to do.

IMO, the developers choose what software they want to write. If Microsoft Word decided to remove the "export to PDF" feature, that would be their right. And it would be your right to stop using Microsoft Word. If you want to be root on your system, you are free to install a system that gives you root access.

And that's the part that I believe should be a right: if you buy a smartphone, you own that piece of hardware, and you should be able to install the system you want. But if you are not the one developing that system, you don't get to decide what this system does. Just like you don't get to decide whether Microsoft Word can export to PDF or not.

Re: Keep Android Open

#573

Post by shakna »

briandear wrote: post #553
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not? It's their operating system It's my phone.

Is anything stopping you from coding your own OS?

Reverse engineering the drivers, to permit you creating your own OS, for your own hardware, is already an area where people are accused of crimes. DMCA Section 1201 isn't something to so easily be worked around, to allow you to place your software in a working state onto undocumented hardware.

So, yes, there is a lot of things stopping you from coding your own OS.

Re: Keep Android Open

#574

Post by microtonal »

palata wrote: post #562
microtonal wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It comes from a history of using mostly trusted application sources like Debian/Ubuntu package archives with manual review being the norm. And few supply chain attacks. What most of these people do not seem to get is that proper sandboxing does not only protect against attacks from the inside (rogue developer, supply chain attack), but also from the outside. Most desktop apps probably have a good number of security v…

Agreed. I want to "own my device" as in "being able to install the system I want on it". Not as in "I want it to behave exactly like Desktop Linux", or whatever it is that people complain about AOSP. On my Desktop I love Linux. But on my smartphone, I want AOSP.

Largely agreed, though I think on the desktop I’d also want AOSP in desktop mode with a traditional Linux distribution in a VM pretty much like Android 16’s Linux VM.

But then on desktop/laptop-class hardware, since the thermal constraints are different and it’s nice to have extensible storage and RAM. Of course, all this on the phone is also nice for when you only have your phone with you.

Then one could use fully sandboxed apps for banks, instant messaging, etc. and the VM for development.

AOSP is getting pretty close to this ideal.

Re: Keep Android Open

#575

Post by wiseowise »

fragmede wrote: post #500
greatgib wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even restricting the mitigation to "students and hobbyists" is bad. I should have the right to have parents, friends or anyone use a "free" store that is not under control of Google if the user and app developer wish so. But also, somehow there should be something done to avoid the monopoly forcing to use the Google services. Like major institutions like bank, gov and co being forced to provide alternatives like a we…

But unfortunately, it turns out that some people you interact with aren't actually your friend. That guy that seems totally legit and just wants your sister to install his fun little game/app that he wrote is actually trying to get her to install an app that's going to track your location and read all your messages and copy all your photos. To keep her safe from the "actually" bad people, of course.

> That guy that seems totally legit and just wants your sister to install his fun little game/app that he wrote is actually trying to get her to install an app that's going to track your location and read all your messages and copy all your photos.

Is "that guy" in the room with us right now?

Re: Keep Android Open

#576

Post by wiseowise »

sulam wrote: post #510
greatgib wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even restricting the mitigation to "students and hobbyists" is bad. I should have the right to have parents, friends or anyone use a "free" store that is not under control of Google if the user and app developer wish so. But also, somehow there should be something done to avoid the monopoly forcing to use the Google services. Like major institutions like bank, gov and co being forced to provide alternatives like a we…

I'm far from a Google apologist, but at the end of the day don't they have the right to write software however they want it? You have the right to build things the way you want to, fork Android, etc etc. If you're trying to say you have the right to tell Google what the code their employees write can do, well, I don't really agree with that. Sounds coercive, honestly. I wouldn't want them to do that to you and I don'…

> I'm far from a Google apologist, but at the end of the day don't they have the right to write software however they want it?

Not after creating de facto duopoly.

Re: Keep Android Open

#577

Post by palata »

microtonal wrote: post #574
palata wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I want to "own my device" as in "being able to install the system I want on it". Not as in "I want it to behave exactly like Desktop Linux", or whatever it is that people complain about AOSP. On my Desktop I love Linux. But on my smartphone, I want AOSP.

Largely agreed, though I think on the desktop I’d also want AOSP in desktop mode with a traditional Linux distribution in a VM pretty much like Android 16’s Linux VM. But then on desktop/laptop-class hardware, since the thermal constraints are different and it’s nice to have extensible storage and RAM. Of course, all this on the phone is also nice for when you only have your phone with you. Then one could use fully s…

> AOSP is getting pretty close to this ideal.

Yes I can totally imagine that in a few years, most people will only need a smartphone and a dock station. At home, they will plug their phone (iOS, Android, whatever) to their dock station and it will behave as a Desktop. And it will be good enough for everything they do.

Re: Keep Android Open

#578

Post by edg5000 »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #394

I want Google to lock down their platform. Hardcore locked down. So locked down you can't do anything with it at all. Because people need motivation to do something hard. Android has been a bloated walled garden for years. It should have been like a PC w/Windows or Linux: anyone should be able to make an app (any way they want), publish it, let anyone who wants to download it & run it. But that was never the plan. Th…

It's really a cultural disease to accept this. From my other comment:

> I see this in people why have used antagonistic software for decades and have become zombified and shellshocked; the idea that software could be on your side is to alien to them. They['ve come to] hate software and technology and just want to get some work done. They tolerate the abuse because they can't fight Google alone; it's pointless to resist.

*minor edit in brackets

Re: Keep Android Open

#579

Post by maxloh »

palata wrote: post #561
maxloh wrote: post #505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. It is [1]. Surprisingly, Android Studio is open source too [2]. [1]: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/sdk/+/refs/heads/m... [2]: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/tools/base/+/studi...

Oh is it Apache 2? That's what I see looking at a random file [1] but there is no global LICENSE file. And I didn't expect Android-Studio to be open source! [1]: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/sdk/+/refs/heads/m...

Yeah, they're Apache 2.0. That's how Android and some of its forks handle licensing.

For example, most repos in LineageOS's GitHub org lack a global LICENSE file. Instead, licensing is specified on a file-by-file basis within the comment headers.

This does lead to some ambiguity though. You can't put a license header into binary files like PNGs. In those cases, you can only trust that Google won't sue you for using them.

Re: Keep Android Open

#580

Post by elAhmo »

edg5000 wrote: post #571

I want Google as an app, not OS. Hear me out. Imagine an open device where you can run Google as just another sandboxed app. Inside, they can exert all the control they want. My bank and government can force me to use Google. Then, at least I control my hardware and my OS. It's just nasty to have your device and OS controlled by an antagonistic entity. I see this in people why have used antagonistic software for deca…

But Google doesn't want you running their app and not their OS, this is the whole idea behind Android and their hardware in general :)
Post reply on HN