5 ms·

I'd say this is a very clever political move. It's a privacy-conscious alternative to Google's libraries, supported financially by the German government. If thi

I'd say this is a very clever political move. It's a privacy-conscious alternative to Google's libraries, supported financially by the German government. If this becomes popular with users, it'll limit Google's and the US government's access to mobile data from EU citizens.

bluGill 6y ago
Only if it becomes popular. Which means phones need to come with it preinstalled somehow. If this starts to become popular I expect Google to take steps to lock it out. Changing things constantly (which google does all the time anyway) it the obvious one to make it a moving target that this cannot hit.
- ryukafalz 6y ago
  They could change their server-side services constantly, but part of this is an implementation of important APIs they've put in Play Services instead of AOSP (e.g. location services). Can't change those without affecting apps that use them too.
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  I have a vague feeling that if Google takes active steps to lock out a government project, the EU will find a way to motivate Google to play nice. I mean Google surely wouldn't want to give anyone an incentive to revive that $1bn historical tax debate or the $1.5bn antitrust investigation ;)
  - falcor84 6y ago
    You have a point there, but Google's profits from Android are at least one order of magnitude larger than the numbers you quoted [0], and it may be rational for them to risk the fight. [0] https://www.kamilfranek.com/how-google-makes-money-from-android/ https://www.kamilfranek.com/how-google-makes-money-from-andr...
    - bluGill 6y ago
      Maybe, but the counter is enough money is at play to create a successful competitor. Someone doing a smart phone with 1/10th the penetration of Android is somewhat significant and not to be ignored. (in absolute numbers that is more than the number of Mac users vs Windows users)
  - pmachinery 6y ago
    Is this a government project though? I don't know anything about it other than their site, but it states that it was supported "in 2019" by PrototypeFund ("a project of the Open Knowledge Foundation Germany, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research") and/but "since 2020" supported by E Foundation.
  - FpUser 6y ago
    Google may be able to make specific deals for particular countries and hence greatly limit the impact.
  - jmnicolas 6y ago
    What's 1.5 billion for Google? Apparently they give something like 10bn every year to Apple to be their default search engine. I much prefer the Japanese way: you get a massive fine AND you have to close shop for a certain amount of time. It's much more painful for a company not to work than to pay a fine.
- pydry 6y ago
  Making it a moving target they can't hit would be a lot harder a few years ago when customers were more demanding of new functionality. These days people are less keen on upgrading on every iteration than they used to be and are happier using older kit for longer. If they upped the maintenance window, in fact, that would force google to compete even more fiercely coz users would have to really really want the new features. I, for one, would vastly prefer using this over the latest android even if it lagged a couple versions and cost a bit more.
- josefx 6y ago
  > I expect Google to take steps to lock it out. They already did years ago. The PlayStore license prohibits manufacturers from providing Android based systems that do not come with Googles "services" preinstalled. Unsurprisingly this has been found illegal in many countries.
  - srtjstjsj 6y ago
    From what I can find, that's not accurate. The issue was that Google required manufacturers to include various Google friendly default choices in exchange for getting access to Play Services and other Google apps. It was not about banning AOSP-based Google-less systems (like Amazon Fire, which hugely disproves your claim). https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160420/10225434223/eu-officially-goes-after-googles-android-antitrust-grounds.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160420/10225434223/eu-of...
    - GeekyBear 6y ago
      The EU antitrust findings definitely included Google banning device makers from manufacturing devices running a fork of Android. >In particular, the EC has decided that Google: has required manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search app and browser app (Chrome), as a condition for licensing Google’s app store (the Play Store); made payments to certain large manufacturers and mobile network operators on condition that they exclusively pre-installed the Google Search app on their devices; and has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called “Android forks”). https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/18/google-gets-slapped-5bn-by-eu-for-android-antitrust-abuse/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/18/google-gets-slapped-5bn-by...
    - josefx 6y ago
      > like Amazon Fire, which hugely disproves your claim The FireOS wiki page calls out how members of the Open Handset alliance (which includes almost all relevant manufacturers) are explicitly prohibited from using Android forks like it[1]. It exists in spite of Googles efforts to insert anti competitive language into any bit of legalese it gets its hands on. All its existence proofs is that Google sucks at being a knock of 90s Microsoft. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_OS#Amazon's_ecosystem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_OS#Amazon's_ecosystem
zamadatix 6y ago
The wording in this comment makes it sound like the German goverment was involved a lot more than a 1 year research grant which caps at €47,500 (couldn't find the exact amount they actually got) 4 years into the project that wasn't renewed the next year (not sure if it's even renewable). I.e. glad to see the funding but it was a one off standard research grant not a special political chess move.
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  If I understand it correctly, the "Open Knowledge Foundation Deutschland" has received roughly $3 mio in government funding annually to promote "Cyber sovereignty". You are correct that the individual grant to microG was probably capped at €47k, but since they also sent out grant money to https://www.qubes-os.org/ https://www.qubes-os.org/ https://openwrt.org/ https://openwrt.org/ https://bitmask.net/ https://bitmask.net/ https://github.com/juga0/dhcpcanon https://github.com/juga0/dhcpcanon https://taler.net/en/index.html https://taler.net/en/index.html https://identity-stick.github.io/ https://identity-stick.github.io/ https://github.com/lernapparat/lotranslate https://github.com/lernapparat/lotranslate https://sbws.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://sbws.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://leap.se/ https://leap.se/ https://robur.io/Our%20Work/Projects#OpenVPN https://robur.io/Our%20Work/Projects#OpenVPN it looks like a coordinated campaign to me. The list includes a privacy-conscious OS, some VPNs, some Tor services, and a Cloud-free translation system for LibreOffice. microG very much fits into that list of tools to avoid Google's spying eye.
  - mlinksva 6y ago
    More background on this fund https://prototypefund.de/en/ https://prototypefund.de/en/ https://okfn.de/en/projekte/prototypefund/ https://okfn.de/en/projekte/prototypefund/
  - crtasm 6y ago
    Unless I'm missing something it wasn't the QubesOS team that got funding: https://prototypefund.de/en/project/portable-firewall-for-qubesos/ https://prototypefund.de/en/project/portable-firewall-for-qu... Though I'm also unsure why that page links a github repo that hasn't been updated since 2017, and is a fork of one that is active as of last month.
vesinisa 6y ago
Public funding of research does not imply a political endorsement.
SubzeroCarnage 6y ago
This is not political at all. microG has been in development for many years now. Marvin, the creator, has made many contributions to FOSS Android apps and is IMO a pillar of the FOSS Android community.
stjohnswarts 6y ago
You are aware that Germany is a member of SSEUR, right? Forget privacy and assume it's all plain text unless it's encrypted and signed.

bluGill 6y ago

Only if it becomes popular. Which means phones need to come with it preinstalled somehow. If this starts to become popular I expect Google to take steps to lock it out. Changing things constantly (which google does all the time anyway) it the obvious one to make it a moving target that this cannot hit.

ryukafalz 6y ago
They could change their server-side services constantly, but part of this is an implementation of important APIs they've put in Play Services instead of AOSP (e.g. location services). Can't change those without affecting apps that use them too.
fxtentacle 6y ago
I have a vague feeling that if Google takes active steps to lock out a government project, the EU will find a way to motivate Google to play nice. I mean Google surely wouldn't want to give anyone an incentive to revive that $1bn historical tax debate or the $1.5bn antitrust investigation ;)
- falcor84 6y ago
  You have a point there, but Google's profits from Android are at least one order of magnitude larger than the numbers you quoted [0], and it may be rational for them to risk the fight. [0] https://www.kamilfranek.com/how-google-makes-money-from-android/ https://www.kamilfranek.com/how-google-makes-money-from-andr...
  - bluGill 6y ago
    Maybe, but the counter is enough money is at play to create a successful competitor. Someone doing a smart phone with 1/10th the penetration of Android is somewhat significant and not to be ignored. (in absolute numbers that is more than the number of Mac users vs Windows users)
- pmachinery 6y ago
  Is this a government project though? I don't know anything about it other than their site, but it states that it was supported "in 2019" by PrototypeFund ("a project of the Open Knowledge Foundation Germany, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research") and/but "since 2020" supported by E Foundation.
- FpUser 6y ago
  Google may be able to make specific deals for particular countries and hence greatly limit the impact.
- jmnicolas 6y ago
  What's 1.5 billion for Google? Apparently they give something like 10bn every year to Apple to be their default search engine. I much prefer the Japanese way: you get a massive fine AND you have to close shop for a certain amount of time. It's much more painful for a company not to work than to pay a fine.
pydry 6y ago
Making it a moving target they can't hit would be a lot harder a few years ago when customers were more demanding of new functionality. These days people are less keen on upgrading on every iteration than they used to be and are happier using older kit for longer. If they upped the maintenance window, in fact, that would force google to compete even more fiercely coz users would have to really really want the new features. I, for one, would vastly prefer using this over the latest android even if it lagged a couple versions and cost a bit more.
josefx 6y ago
> I expect Google to take steps to lock it out. They already did years ago. The PlayStore license prohibits manufacturers from providing Android based systems that do not come with Googles "services" preinstalled. Unsurprisingly this has been found illegal in many countries.
- srtjstjsj 6y ago
  From what I can find, that's not accurate. The issue was that Google required manufacturers to include various Google friendly default choices in exchange for getting access to Play Services and other Google apps. It was not about banning AOSP-based Google-less systems (like Amazon Fire, which hugely disproves your claim). https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160420/10225434223/eu-officially-goes-after-googles-android-antitrust-grounds.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20160420/10225434223/eu-of...
  - GeekyBear 6y ago
    The EU antitrust findings definitely included Google banning device makers from manufacturing devices running a fork of Android. >In particular, the EC has decided that Google: has required manufacturers to pre-install the Google Search app and browser app (Chrome), as a condition for licensing Google’s app store (the Play Store); made payments to certain large manufacturers and mobile network operators on condition that they exclusively pre-installed the Google Search app on their devices; and has prevented manufacturers wishing to pre-install Google apps from selling even a single smart mobile device running on alternative versions of Android that were not approved by Google (so-called “Android forks”). https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/18/google-gets-slapped-5bn-by-eu-for-android-antitrust-abuse/ https://techcrunch.com/2018/07/18/google-gets-slapped-5bn-by...
  - josefx 6y ago
    > like Amazon Fire, which hugely disproves your claim The FireOS wiki page calls out how members of the Open Handset alliance (which includes almost all relevant manufacturers) are explicitly prohibited from using Android forks like it[1]. It exists in spite of Googles efforts to insert anti competitive language into any bit of legalese it gets its hands on. All its existence proofs is that Google sucks at being a knock of 90s Microsoft. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_OS#Amazon's_ecosystem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_OS#Amazon's_ecosystem

zamadatix 6y ago

The wording in this comment makes it sound like the German goverment was involved a lot more than a 1 year research grant which caps at €47,500 (couldn't find the exact amount they actually got) 4 years into the project that wasn't renewed the next year (not sure if it's even renewable). I.e. glad to see the funding but it was a one off standard research grant not a special political chess move.

fxtentacle 6y ago
If I understand it correctly, the "Open Knowledge Foundation Deutschland" has received roughly $3 mio in government funding annually to promote "Cyber sovereignty". You are correct that the individual grant to microG was probably capped at €47k, but since they also sent out grant money to https://www.qubes-os.org/ https://www.qubes-os.org/ https://openwrt.org/ https://openwrt.org/ https://bitmask.net/ https://bitmask.net/ https://github.com/juga0/dhcpcanon https://github.com/juga0/dhcpcanon https://taler.net/en/index.html https://taler.net/en/index.html https://identity-stick.github.io/ https://identity-stick.github.io/ https://github.com/lernapparat/lotranslate https://github.com/lernapparat/lotranslate https://sbws.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://sbws.readthedocs.io/en/latest/ https://leap.se/ https://leap.se/ https://robur.io/Our%20Work/Projects#OpenVPN https://robur.io/Our%20Work/Projects#OpenVPN it looks like a coordinated campaign to me. The list includes a privacy-conscious OS, some VPNs, some Tor services, and a Cloud-free translation system for LibreOffice. microG very much fits into that list of tools to avoid Google's spying eye.
- mlinksva 6y ago
  More background on this fund https://prototypefund.de/en/ https://prototypefund.de/en/ https://okfn.de/en/projekte/prototypefund/ https://okfn.de/en/projekte/prototypefund/
- crtasm 6y ago
  Unless I'm missing something it wasn't the QubesOS team that got funding: https://prototypefund.de/en/project/portable-firewall-for-qubesos/ https://prototypefund.de/en/project/portable-firewall-for-qu... Though I'm also unsure why that page links a github repo that hasn't been updated since 2017, and is a fork of one that is active as of last month.

vesinisa 6y ago

Public funding of research does not imply a political endorsement.

SubzeroCarnage 6y ago

This is not political at all. microG has been in development for many years now. Marvin, the creator, has made many contributions to FOSS Android apps and is IMO a pillar of the FOSS Android community.

stjohnswarts 6y ago

You are aware that Germany is a member of SSEUR, right? Forget privacy and assume it's all plain text unless it's encrypted and signed.