Live data from Hacker News

FSF announces Librephone project

fsf.org

621–630 of 669 posts

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#621
post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can use an older pixel, thus not really giving money to Google, and also preventing that phone from landing in a landfill. Without all that Google and carrier excess junk on board, an older phone is fast. You can buy a new pixel, install GrapheneOS, and laugh thinking about how you're denying the enemy the OS level tracking they wanted with that device.

But you still support Google and the closed source Android ecosystem with that.

No, actually, you don't. And Android is not closed source. Google's add ons are.

When you buy a used phone, it's already been bought by someone. The profit is already in Google's hands. Loads of old phones are in drawers somewhere. Once Graphene is on it, it's faster, not bloated, and you don't need Google anything.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#622
post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can do that with web apps And this is not even always possible. In Ukraine, government app is released as an app, not a web service. Same goes for banking app. You just can't do these things from other devices, you must have (mainstream) Android or Apple phone. I've been looking into projects like GrapheneOS for a while now, but it is just impossible to use in Ukraine.

Genuinely curious: why can't you use GrapheneOS in Ukraine? Most Android apps work perfectly. In my case, the only ones that don't are the ones made by lazy developers who rely on location data that I deny. They claim to work without it, but obviously never tested.

Maybe I can after all! I saw on reddit people complaining about banking apps not working, so I just assumed mine would not work as well. But according to this list [1], the biggest Ukrainian banks are supported. Nice

I can't find any info on the government app though. It might not work. But still, I can actually consider GrapheneOS now.

[1] https://privsec.dev/posts/android/banking-applications-compa...

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#623
My thinking on mobile devices, and voice/comms more generally, is that we're probably better off separating the telco-link, voice, and general compute capabilities.

One element of this could be a WiFi-only phone, effectively a VOIP endpoint which relies on whatever local WiFi is available for connectivity. Where a fixed-point WiFi isn't present, that phone could rely on a cellular WiFi hotspot. Given the various vulnerabilities and proprietary aspects of cellular comms, this at least offloads the security concerns to its own device.

Increasingly people are relying on Bluetooth devices to hear and speak through smartphones. The logical extension to me is to move the primary phone guts entirely into a Bluetooth earpiece or headset. This would handle the voice aspect of the call itself.

Palmtop computing appears all but entirely dead (with some DIY/hobbyist exceptions, e.g., the MNT Reform Next (https://www.crowdsupply.com/mnt/mnt-reform-next>). There are also small-form-factor laptops, with 12" and smaller screens being comparable with tablets (and even some of the larger monster smartphones available today), but offering a full, user-controlled, operating system.

There's still the problem of software availability in an iOS/Android App-dominated world. It's technically possible to run many of these within a VM or emulated environment, but some app providers, particularly for financial interactions, attempt to detect and disable this. Ultimately regulation and/or lawsuits may be necessary.

As power-hungry as they are, mobile devices do make remarkable use of available battery capabilities, which is a place traditional laptops will struggle with. There's the question of having to carry multiple devices, though I suspect many of us are doing so already. There's also the possibility that market segmentation will make such users attractive to business and other institutions, reducing the barriers that presently exist.

All that said, I do applaud the FSF's effort, though I would like to see other paths (such as the one I suggest here) pursued as well.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#625
post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rockchip AFAIK doesn't have any. It boots with mainline u-boot, but it doesn't include any wifi or other radios.

It os definitely more open than most, thanks! I'm pretty sure it still has the masked boot rom before getting to the open bits. While the tpl and ddr are still blobs and might harbor naughtiness, people have at least figured out how to edit the blobs https://github.com/hbiyik/rkddr

U-boot for Rockchip builds it's own TPL. I'm using it right now. It can also use Rockchip's TPL, but that's optional, not the default. DDR training code is here:

https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot/tree/master/drivers/ram/roc...

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#626
post #592

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should have terms and rigorous standards for software that is proprietary but not otherwise restrictive of user freedom. Most (weighing by how commonly it's used) software is either traditional, abusive, proprietary software like Windows or Google'd Android or is fully free like Linux. But, there is a large library of software that isn't under a free license, but doesn't attempt to abuse the user into being more p…

The initial sale never has and never will be the issue with non free software; in fact, they can sometimes be acquired free of charge. I get your sentiment and I agree with you that some software can indeed be proprietary without being predatory or abusive. I think there is an issue with your definition of "user freedom". What do you mean by it? Stallman, when defining free software, does not bother with standards or…

I think what GP means by "user freedom" is that the software acts in the interests of its users rather than the interests of its developers. Some proprietary software does do that, but there's an inherent conflict of interest there since the developer has a monopoly on the ability to control said software. Software that is open to user modification (which is how I would personally define Free Software) protects against this conflict somewhat by creating a free market for patches to the software, and free markets are much better at aligning with consumer interests than monopolies.

Stallman goes further than my preferred definition, insisting that Free Software must also be freely redistributable with no required payment. This cripples that very same market for patches by greatly limiting the resources available to fund it, and cripples the software itself if there's no big commercial interest backing it. The result is that Free Software is often not competitive with proprietary software, except when it does have a big commercial backer (Chromium, AOSP, etc) in which case that developer is often able to maintain a virtual monopoly on patches despite it theoretically being open to competition.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#627

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The two major phone OS companies both stand on the shoulders of IBM PC, openly bootable hardware, and the fantastic software systems nurtured and built on top of these platforms — the BSDs, GNU, Linux, and the long tail of all that run on them. It is very troubling that their own platforms are the antithesis of being openly hackable. I can kinda see a lineage from the PC to Android, if only by way of Linux being bo…

It’s a fine thread, but the links from FreeBSD to Darwin are real, and Darwin is behind macOS and iOS. Not just as a kernel, but a lot of the runtime and many of the auxiliary pieces of software too.

Oh, I agree that Darwin is, especially by way of NeXTSTEP but even independently since then, significantly derived from the BSDs (IIRC mostly FreeBSD, but also a chunk of NetBSD code got used to make it). I just think that that would have happened with or without the PC being around. In some parallel universe without IBM making the PC, the unix family still prospers, probably mostly on the 68000 family instead of x86, Apple does their own thing for a while, and then those lineages converge in Darwin just like in our universe.

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#628

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but it ships with PureOS Why does it matter? Yes, I would prefer that FSF collaborated with PureOS directly, but collaborating with postmarketOS also seems possible. There are enough blobs in Librem 5, which don't depend on the OS. > which is ironic given your name Indeed I'm quite surprised about the FSF actions lately.

I wanted to mention that back then when Mozilla announced its FirefoxOS based devices with the "ZTE Open" as a developer device, I realized how broken the ecosystem actually is. The ZTE Open wasn't actually open source and you weren't even able to compile FirefoxOS completely, and only the Gaia (UI) parts could be flashed or changed. So much for open source as a branding, it was a pretty useless device in terms of de…

Are you talking about the Librem's blobs in modem/WiFi or something else?

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#629

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But sure, librem5 probably has most of that already. So it would be less work and would benefit more operating systems to work on it. Yet the FSF chose another hardware - I don't understand why.

Because they aren’t focusing on a specific piece of hardware… I’m really not sure what you are expecting? The librephone project to be focused on librem5 instead of the hardware used in thousands of other devices?

> Because they aren’t focusing on a specific piece of hardware…

How can you reverse engineer firmware without focusing on a specific piece of hardware? Firmware is tied to hardware, isn't it?

Re: FSF announces Librephone project

#630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But sure, librem5 probably has most of that already. So it would be less work and would benefit more operating systems to work on it. Yet the FSF chose another hardware - I don't understand why.

Because they aren’t focusing on a specific piece of hardware… I’m really not sure what you are expecting? The librephone project to be focused on librem5 instead of the hardware used in thousands of other devices?

[dead]
Post reply on HN