9 ms·

It's like confusing "open-source" Android, AOSP and Play Services: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-

It's like confusing "open-source" Android, AOSP and Play Services: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on... >While Android is open, it's more of a "look but don't touch" kind of open. You're allowed to contribute to Android and allowed to use it for little hobbies, but in nearly every area, the deck is stacked against anyone trying to use Android without Google's blessing. The second you try to take Android and do something that Google doesn't approve of, it will bring the world crashing down upon you.

jacooper 4y ago
The difference is, AOSP on its own is unusable, but Chromium Is.
- anonymousab 4y ago
  Google has added proprietary closed source blobs to chromium in the past and there's little reason they wouldn't do so again when they're the only game in town.
  - jacooper 4y ago
    But they arent, chromium forks like brave or edge won't stand and do nothing if something ridiculous happened.
- ohgodplsno 4y ago
  For now.
- gspr 4y ago
  It's pretty close to being unusable as an open source code base. Look at Debian's struggles with maintaining security fixes for Chromium. Sure, the license is open, and Chromium is therefore technically open. But it's dangerously close to not being usable in any real practical meaning of "open source". The way things are, we do indeed stand on the precipice of a Chromium-only web with—for all practical intents and purpose—no open browser. Firefox is the last thing that stands between us and that reality. It's just a shame that they seem to be wasting hundreds of millions on admin and management instead of just throwing it all at their developers.
  - jacooper 4y ago
    Its a Debian problem, there is a flatpak version and its working fine.
    - gspr 4y ago
      You're kinda proving my point: it works fine if you wholeheartedly take whatever Google gives you. Sure, that's technically open source, but is it really practically so if you can't practically adapt it?
      - jacooper 4y ago
        How ? There is brave, Ungoogle chromium, and many other modified browsers that are maintained.
        gspr 4y ago
        Are they maintained? Or are they latest version or bust "maintained"?
        jacooper 4y ago
        Latest version or bust, because really you can't call a browser behind on updates maintained.
  - gsnedders 4y ago
    > Look at Debian's struggles with maintaining security fixes for Chromium. I can't see anything about this anywhere giving any reasons; is it simply that they're released frequently and there aren't really any long-lived branches?
    - gspr 4y ago
      My understanding is that the Chromium folks handle security issues with: "version x.y.z is vulnerable, please update to (x+7).(y+25).(z+2), as it is the only supported version – the fact that the diff from x.y.z is 100 kLOC and touches mostly completely unrelated things is your problem". This isn't sustainable open source development in any practical sense. Sure, it's technically open source, but nearly useless for anything but consumption straight from Google. I'd say that that makes it practically not open source.
- NoGravitas 4y ago
  AOSP on its own was perfectly usable, in the early days. That frog has been thoroughly boiled.
  - jacooper 4y ago
    Pure AOSP is always unusable, because it doesn't have the kernel drivers for any device.
- HWR_14 4y ago
  Oh good, I look forward to the continued ad-blocking Manifest v2 provides after Chrome sunsets it. And we still have to see if other browsers will block the Topics API spyware or not.
  - jacooper 4y ago
    Yeah, I'm looking forward to see what will happens when V2 dies. I'm using brave so this won't change anything for me really. As for the Topics API, It looks like to be a new copy of FLOC, which flopped immediately on release, as no body adopted it other than chrome.
    - HWR_14 4y ago
      Topics is rebranded FLOC. Everyone pushed back on it when FLOC came out, but that was publicly reviled and there was a simple toggle to turn it off (it was an experimental feature). This is an excellent test of Google's ability to just push a very unpopular feature into Chromium derivatives.
      - jacooper 4y ago
        Non google browsers didn't only disable it, they removed it completely. Google has a lot of control over chromium, but I don't think its even close to how gimped AOSP is compared to Android google edition.
        HWR_14 4y ago
        > Non google browsers didn't only disable it, they removed it completely. They set the toggle to false and deactivated any of the options to turn it back on. That's very different from removing a feature (or maintaining a legacy feature). The only code they changed was UX-related and a single default.
encryptluks2 4y ago
Here we are talking about Chromium and you are going off on some rant about Android acting like Google can attack you for using open source licensed software. If you haven't used Chromium on Linux then it would be easy to assume whatever you want. Might I suggest configuring your policy list to disable whatever you want: https://chromeenterprise.google/policies/ https://chromeenterprise.google/policies/

jacooper 4y ago

The difference is, AOSP on its own is unusable, but Chromium Is.

anonymousab 4y ago
Google has added proprietary closed source blobs to chromium in the past and there's little reason they wouldn't do so again when they're the only game in town.
- jacooper 4y ago
  But they arent, chromium forks like brave or edge won't stand and do nothing if something ridiculous happened.
ohgodplsno 4y ago
For now.
gspr 4y ago
It's pretty close to being unusable as an open source code base. Look at Debian's struggles with maintaining security fixes for Chromium. Sure, the license is open, and Chromium is therefore technically open. But it's dangerously close to not being usable in any real practical meaning of "open source". The way things are, we do indeed stand on the precipice of a Chromium-only web with—for all practical intents and purpose—no open browser. Firefox is the last thing that stands between us and that reality. It's just a shame that they seem to be wasting hundreds of millions on admin and management instead of just throwing it all at their developers.
- jacooper 4y ago
  Its a Debian problem, there is a flatpak version and its working fine.
  - gspr 4y ago
    You're kinda proving my point: it works fine if you wholeheartedly take whatever Google gives you. Sure, that's technically open source, but is it really practically so if you can't practically adapt it?
    - jacooper 4y ago
      How ? There is brave, Ungoogle chromium, and many other modified browsers that are maintained.
      - gspr 4y ago
        Are they maintained? Or are they latest version or bust "maintained"?
        jacooper 4y ago
        Latest version or bust, because really you can't call a browser behind on updates maintained.
- gsnedders 4y ago
  > Look at Debian's struggles with maintaining security fixes for Chromium. I can't see anything about this anywhere giving any reasons; is it simply that they're released frequently and there aren't really any long-lived branches?
  - gspr 4y ago
    My understanding is that the Chromium folks handle security issues with: "version x.y.z is vulnerable, please update to (x+7).(y+25).(z+2), as it is the only supported version – the fact that the diff from x.y.z is 100 kLOC and touches mostly completely unrelated things is your problem". This isn't sustainable open source development in any practical sense. Sure, it's technically open source, but nearly useless for anything but consumption straight from Google. I'd say that that makes it practically not open source.
NoGravitas 4y ago
AOSP on its own was perfectly usable, in the early days. That frog has been thoroughly boiled.
- jacooper 4y ago
  Pure AOSP is always unusable, because it doesn't have the kernel drivers for any device.
HWR_14 4y ago
Oh good, I look forward to the continued ad-blocking Manifest v2 provides after Chrome sunsets it. And we still have to see if other browsers will block the Topics API spyware or not.
- jacooper 4y ago
  Yeah, I'm looking forward to see what will happens when V2 dies. I'm using brave so this won't change anything for me really. As for the Topics API, It looks like to be a new copy of FLOC, which flopped immediately on release, as no body adopted it other than chrome.
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    Topics is rebranded FLOC. Everyone pushed back on it when FLOC came out, but that was publicly reviled and there was a simple toggle to turn it off (it was an experimental feature). This is an excellent test of Google's ability to just push a very unpopular feature into Chromium derivatives.
    - jacooper 4y ago
      Non google browsers didn't only disable it, they removed it completely. Google has a lot of control over chromium, but I don't think its even close to how gimped AOSP is compared to Android google edition.
      - HWR_14 4y ago
        > Non google browsers didn't only disable it, they removed it completely. They set the toggle to false and deactivated any of the options to turn it back on. That's very different from removing a feature (or maintaining a legacy feature). The only code they changed was UX-related and a single default.

encryptluks2 4y ago

Here we are talking about Chromium and you are going off on some rant about Android acting like Google can attack you for using open source licensed software. If you haven't used Chromium on Linux then it would be easy to assume whatever you want. Might I suggest configuring your policy list to disable whatever you want: https://chromeenterprise.google/policies/ https://chromeenterprise.google/policies/