5 ms·

EU regulators should be asking for unlocked phones with open source drivers. Then we can use the phones longer without depending on these orgs.

actually_a_dog 4y ago
Not without 5 years of OS and application support. That's the primary reason I "junk drawer"'ed my previous iPhone. Had the OS and app support still been there, I might still be using it today.
- wtallis 4y ago
  Unlocked bootloaders and open source drivers are the only viable way to get 5+ years of OS support on Android phones. Even with a regulatory mandate, most Android phone manufacturers would be unable to provide satisfactory software maintenance on that kind of time scale. But community projects would be able to do so, and are already doing so in niches where bootloaders and drivers are not a barrier.
  - actually_a_dog 4y ago
    If that's the case, then what they're trying to do simply will not work. Unlocked boot loaders and open source drivers might be enough for you and me to keep our phones in service for 5 additional years, but it's not going to be enough for my mom. There are far more people out there like my mom than there are people like you and me.
    - fezfight 4y ago
      If we were to give up all the things that someone's figurative family members couldn't handle, we'd be literally living in the dark ages.
      - actually_a_dog 4y ago
        If we don't come up with sustainable ways for those metaphorical family members to consume, we'll end up there anyway.
        fezfight 4y ago
        You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Because your mother can't easily update her phone, you'd have it so no one can? No, that's just silly.
        actually_a_dog 4y ago
        And you're strawmanning. That's not what I said at all. Please do not put words in my mouth. I said that this action by the EU will not result in more sustainable consumption, which seems to be the reason behind it. I wouldn't oppose forcing phones to be more open in order to increase their lifespan, but I also wouldn't expect that to increase sustainability.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        fezfight 4y ago
        Not strawmanning, just misunderstood! I think it would help, but it would require a big shift in the way people think about phones. They'd need to be thought of as computers right (which they are), so people would expect to be able to update them like they do a regular computer. Then even lay people could benefit by getting secure hand me downs.
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      If grandma can't install lineage that's fine. She can sell or give the phone to someone who can who then uses it, sells it, or gives it to someone else (or back to grandma). Grandma can't fix a car either but she can at least get the tyres changed without paying the car's rrp and getting someone to heat it up within a few degrees of exploding, or drive it on a new road without it having a tantrum.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- olliej 4y ago
  But iPhones do get 5 years of OS support? The iPhone 5 got major functionality updates in late 2019 I think 6 years after release, and got that apparently major security update this week (or last), which is 9 years
  - fezfight 4y ago
    In addition to pioneering the majority of the ways phones are locked down, they also lost a lawsuit for degrading the performance of older phones with those updates. So it's not really a good thing? We want to be able to replace the battery ourselves cheaply with third party batteries if we want, or carry spares, and update the drivers and OS indefinitely, even if we have to do it ourselves. We want to replace a screen, or a board without getting our property bricked.
    - Tagbert 4y ago
      You say that like the aim of the update was just to slow down those older phones (mainly iPhone 6). The problem was that the battery design of the iPhone 6 had a problem when it got old and could no longer provide enough power to run the SOC at full speed without sudden shutdowns. The patch slowed the SOC down enough that the battery could still provide a steady supply of power.
      - fezfight 4y ago
        It was the point. It was planned obsolescence. They lost or settled several lawsuits about it.
        labcomputer 4y ago
        It obviously wasn’t, and it’s disingenuous to argue otherwise. Those phones had “mysterious” shutdown issues with ~20% battery remaining that started being reported about 6 months after release (when it was still the latest iPhone). Those same issues were somehow fixed with a software update, but not before the shutdowns made a bunch of customers angry. It’s obvious that Apple simply under-specced the batteries, not that they were trying to make the phone wear out early.
sylware 4y ago
Like they forgot noscript/basic (x)html interop for the web in their last "digital related" directive (which is a step in the right direction, but a very shy step). That said, open source drivers are not enough, need proper hardware programing manuals with erratas. The first thing I would do is trash android for a homebrew elf/linux derivative.
- dmitrygr 4y ago
  > The first thing I would do is trash android for a homebrew elf/linux derivative. Written by whom? I don’t think you can even fathom the complexity of modern phone SoCs. They make an x86 PC look like an oversimplified teaching exercise. And even x86 PCs aren’t as well supported by Linux as by commercial OSs. Fun to dream but the likelihood of this statement coming true is zero.
  - fezfight 4y ago
    So let's not even give them the chance? Ridiculous.
    - dmitrygr 4y ago
      Many IP blocks in modern SoCs are licensed from third parties (eg synopsis). Usually those agreements preclude any public docs. Sorry. This won’t ever happen.
      - fezfight 4y ago
        If it's mandated? Sure it could. I agree that it would be hard but people need to remember that the government represents us. If we want it, we can make it happen.
        sylware 4y ago
        ... and you never get the right laws, and if you get some, they are hardly ever applied, and at best in an efficient and time limited way. And you get those politicians with phantom jobs with stellar wages in proxies of companies they were supposed to protect us from.
olliej 4y ago
I appreciate the intent, but I suspect that’s not something they could do as I think they’re mostly using third party modems and presumably drivers still and many of those companies are utter asses. But also what does open source driver mean here - does it mean for any OS, public domain, etc? Because if so then you’re talking about the government requiring people to give up their property.
- fezfight 4y ago
  Not people, but I'd like incumbent mega-corporations be compelled to not lock down the devices they sell. And device drivers for android, at minimum, since the ASOP folks could use them now. Linux would be great because it would eventually thrive in an environment like that.
- hedora 4y ago
  The first sale doctrine also forces people to give up their property (when they sell it). From a consumer protection perspectiv, it seems completely reasonable to say hardware devices have to have FOSS drivers, and that all hardware/software errata must be documented in public for at least N years. That could be watered down by only requiring the open sourcing / public docs when the manufacturer decides to drop driver support for the current release of the phone OS.
  - olliej 4y ago
    What are you talking about? First sale doctrine means that if you sell something, you've sold it and no longer own it. It does not mean you own the IP that went into making that product. Buying a car doesn't give you the rights to the manufacturers patents, or the design of the engine, it gives you ownership of the final product. If someone sells you a computer with linux on it you don't suddenly have ownership of the linux copyright. > From a consumer protection perspectiv, it seems completely reasonable to say hardware devices have to have FOSS drivers, and that all hardware/software errata must be documented in public for at least N years. Why? > That could be watered down by only requiring the open sourcing / public docs when the manufacturer decides to drop driver support for the current release of the phone OS. Again why? If your device still functions why should the manufacturer be required to give up ownership of their IP?

actually_a_dog 4y ago

Not without 5 years of OS and application support. That's the primary reason I "junk drawer"'ed my previous iPhone. Had the OS and app support still been there, I might still be using it today.

wtallis 4y ago
Unlocked bootloaders and open source drivers are the only viable way to get 5+ years of OS support on Android phones. Even with a regulatory mandate, most Android phone manufacturers would be unable to provide satisfactory software maintenance on that kind of time scale. But community projects would be able to do so, and are already doing so in niches where bootloaders and drivers are not a barrier.
- actually_a_dog 4y ago
  If that's the case, then what they're trying to do simply will not work. Unlocked boot loaders and open source drivers might be enough for you and me to keep our phones in service for 5 additional years, but it's not going to be enough for my mom. There are far more people out there like my mom than there are people like you and me.
  - fezfight 4y ago
    If we were to give up all the things that someone's figurative family members couldn't handle, we'd be literally living in the dark ages.
    - actually_a_dog 4y ago
      If we don't come up with sustainable ways for those metaphorical family members to consume, we'll end up there anyway.
      - fezfight 4y ago
        You're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Because your mother can't easily update her phone, you'd have it so no one can? No, that's just silly.
        actually_a_dog 4y ago
        And you're strawmanning. That's not what I said at all. Please do not put words in my mouth. I said that this action by the EU will not result in more sustainable consumption, which seems to be the reason behind it. I wouldn't oppose forcing phones to be more open in order to increase their lifespan, but I also wouldn't expect that to increase sustainability.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
        fezfight 4y ago
        Not strawmanning, just misunderstood! I think it would help, but it would require a big shift in the way people think about phones. They'd need to be thought of as computers right (which they are), so people would expect to be able to update them like they do a regular computer. Then even lay people could benefit by getting secure hand me downs.
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    If grandma can't install lineage that's fine. She can sell or give the phone to someone who can who then uses it, sells it, or gives it to someone else (or back to grandma). Grandma can't fix a car either but she can at least get the tyres changed without paying the car's rrp and getting someone to heat it up within a few degrees of exploding, or drive it on a new road without it having a tantrum.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
olliej 4y ago
But iPhones do get 5 years of OS support? The iPhone 5 got major functionality updates in late 2019 I think 6 years after release, and got that apparently major security update this week (or last), which is 9 years
- fezfight 4y ago
  In addition to pioneering the majority of the ways phones are locked down, they also lost a lawsuit for degrading the performance of older phones with those updates. So it's not really a good thing? We want to be able to replace the battery ourselves cheaply with third party batteries if we want, or carry spares, and update the drivers and OS indefinitely, even if we have to do it ourselves. We want to replace a screen, or a board without getting our property bricked.
  - Tagbert 4y ago
    You say that like the aim of the update was just to slow down those older phones (mainly iPhone 6). The problem was that the battery design of the iPhone 6 had a problem when it got old and could no longer provide enough power to run the SOC at full speed without sudden shutdowns. The patch slowed the SOC down enough that the battery could still provide a steady supply of power.
    - fezfight 4y ago
      It was the point. It was planned obsolescence. They lost or settled several lawsuits about it.
      - labcomputer 4y ago
        It obviously wasn’t, and it’s disingenuous to argue otherwise. Those phones had “mysterious” shutdown issues with ~20% battery remaining that started being reported about 6 months after release (when it was still the latest iPhone). Those same issues were somehow fixed with a software update, but not before the shutdowns made a bunch of customers angry. It’s obvious that Apple simply under-specced the batteries, not that they were trying to make the phone wear out early.

sylware 4y ago

Like they forgot noscript/basic (x)html interop for the web in their last "digital related" directive (which is a step in the right direction, but a very shy step). That said, open source drivers are not enough, need proper hardware programing manuals with erratas. The first thing I would do is trash android for a homebrew elf/linux derivative.

dmitrygr 4y ago
> The first thing I would do is trash android for a homebrew elf/linux derivative. Written by whom? I don’t think you can even fathom the complexity of modern phone SoCs. They make an x86 PC look like an oversimplified teaching exercise. And even x86 PCs aren’t as well supported by Linux as by commercial OSs. Fun to dream but the likelihood of this statement coming true is zero.
- fezfight 4y ago
  So let's not even give them the chance? Ridiculous.
  - dmitrygr 4y ago
    Many IP blocks in modern SoCs are licensed from third parties (eg synopsis). Usually those agreements preclude any public docs. Sorry. This won’t ever happen.
    - fezfight 4y ago
      If it's mandated? Sure it could. I agree that it would be hard but people need to remember that the government represents us. If we want it, we can make it happen.
      - sylware 4y ago
        ... and you never get the right laws, and if you get some, they are hardly ever applied, and at best in an efficient and time limited way. And you get those politicians with phantom jobs with stellar wages in proxies of companies they were supposed to protect us from.

olliej 4y ago

I appreciate the intent, but I suspect that’s not something they could do as I think they’re mostly using third party modems and presumably drivers still and many of those companies are utter asses. But also what does open source driver mean here - does it mean for any OS, public domain, etc? Because if so then you’re talking about the government requiring people to give up their property.

fezfight 4y ago
Not people, but I'd like incumbent mega-corporations be compelled to not lock down the devices they sell. And device drivers for android, at minimum, since the ASOP folks could use them now. Linux would be great because it would eventually thrive in an environment like that.
hedora 4y ago
The first sale doctrine also forces people to give up their property (when they sell it). From a consumer protection perspectiv, it seems completely reasonable to say hardware devices have to have FOSS drivers, and that all hardware/software errata must be documented in public for at least N years. That could be watered down by only requiring the open sourcing / public docs when the manufacturer decides to drop driver support for the current release of the phone OS.
- olliej 4y ago
  What are you talking about? First sale doctrine means that if you sell something, you've sold it and no longer own it. It does not mean you own the IP that went into making that product. Buying a car doesn't give you the rights to the manufacturers patents, or the design of the engine, it gives you ownership of the final product. If someone sells you a computer with linux on it you don't suddenly have ownership of the linux copyright. > From a consumer protection perspectiv, it seems completely reasonable to say hardware devices have to have FOSS drivers, and that all hardware/software errata must be documented in public for at least N years. Why? > That could be watered down by only requiring the open sourcing / public docs when the manufacturer decides to drop driver support for the current release of the phone OS. Again why? If your device still functions why should the manufacturer be required to give up ownership of their IP?