5 ms·

The problem is not the ability to unlock your phone. The problem is that 90% of people unlocking their phones will either be for piracy (against the company’s

The problem is not the ability to unlock your phone. The problem is that 90% of people unlocking their phones will either be for piracy (against the company’s interests), or against the customer's own interests (stalkerware, data extraction, sale of stolen devices). There is a reason malware is over 50 times as prevalent on Android.

stavros 2y ago
Why do I give a shit about the company? I bought the phone, it's mine, I should be able to unlock it. If I catch malware, I'm an adult and I'll live with my choices. > There is a reason malware is over 50 times as prevalent on Android. What's the reason for that bogus-sounding statistic?
- alias_neo 2y ago
  Let's say for a second it was accurate (It's probably not), perhaps it's because Android has a far higher market share globally, and it's much cheaper and easier to get started writing apps (or malware) for Android than say iOS. You also don't need to buy a single device from Google to get started. You can take the PC you're at and get started right away, and publish that app (or malware) without spending a penny (though I don't recall whether they still charge that nominal fee to get a developer account). Saying 90% of people root for piracy is hilarious, I rooted every Android device I owned until the last one or two, and I've never pirated anything, why did I root? Mainly for customisation and host-based ad-blocking. I can't understand the thought process of these people who think the things you own should be locked down to protect you. We should stop selling screwdrivers too in case someone's granny tries to open their toaster and electrocutes themselves, after all, a screwdriver is the pre-tech root access to all things electrical and electronic. I suspect those same people who argue in favour of locking these devices down would also say "don't by silly, my granny wouldn't open her toaster with a screwdriver, because she's not an engineer".
  - stavros 2y ago
    Yeah, agreed. This "I don't want to own my things because I want Big Brother to protect me" attitude is really frustrating, especially when you can have protection without Google holding all the keys. GrapheneOS isn't less secure than stock Android.
    - alias_neo 2y ago
      It's a kind of madness people only have towards our (technology/IT) industry. I don't know if it's because they don't understand it, and that's scary, so they think it's safer for the big boys to hold the keys, but imagine if people acted the same in other contexts? "The bank should keep hold of the keys because otherwise I might accidentally lock myself out, or lose my keys, or leave the door unlocked for a bad guy to come in and steal my stuff". That's fine if you can't trust yourself to look after them, let someone else handle your keys for you, perhaps someone "trust worthy" could offer it as a service, but I'll keep my keys in my own pocket thanks.
saagarjha 2y ago
Having worked on catching Android malware, I can assure you that Android malware does not proliferate because people can unlock their phones.
yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago
Given that the vast majority of Android devices aren't rooted, bootloader unlocked, or even installing apps from outside the store(s) that they ship with, what exactly do you think is the reason for more malware on Android? (Taking the claim at face value)
seszett 2y ago
> The problem is that 90% of people unlocking their phones will either be for piracy (against the company’s interests), or against the customer's own interests (stalkerware, data extraction, sale of stolen devices). Why would you think that? Many Android phones can be unlocked, so it's not a hypothetical situation. I does not enable software piracy, since piracy doesn't depend on root. I know a few persons would install of sort of shit on their phone, including obvious malware, and they lack the knowledge to root their phones. The data extraction problem happens today on unrooted phones in a "legal" way, it's done by your regular friendly companies like TikTok, Google or Meta. Rooting enables limiting this which is likely why they are against it. If you look around on forums that discuss the topic of unlocking/rooting Android phones you will see that there is little discussion of piracy and people seem mostly driven by the will to control their own machine instead.
raxxor 2y ago
There would be no piracy on smartphones. That would require desirable applications. Those don't exist because the environment is that shitty.
xorcist 2y ago
Where does the 50x figure come from and what types of malware does it include? It doesn't really match neither my experience or pricing on the grey exploit market. Malware has a wide definition however, and if you include all the spyware included with phones that aren't sold outside China and to a degree also India, you could probably hit that mark. But as they aren't allowed to access Google services or the official Play store, it's also a bit misleading.
scarface_74 2y ago
It came out in the Apple vs Epic trial that 90% of all App Store revenue comes from in app purchase for games - mostly pay to win games. If they all went out of business, nothing of value would be loss. Then you have apps that are free clients for services. There is very little legitimate money being made by mobile from people actually buying apps
_Algernon_ 2y ago
>The problem is that 90% of people unlocking their phones will either be for piracy (against the company’s interests), or against the customer's own interests (stalkerware, data extraction, sale of stolen devices). The first point is irrelevant once I've bought a thing. Once I own a thing it is mine to do with what I want, and the company's interests ought to be irrelevant. As for your second point, that is mitigated by making the process sufficiently annoying (eg. hiding it in the developer menu).

stavros 2y ago

Why do I give a shit about the company? I bought the phone, it's mine, I should be able to unlock it. If I catch malware, I'm an adult and I'll live with my choices. > There is a reason malware is over 50 times as prevalent on Android. What's the reason for that bogus-sounding statistic?

alias_neo 2y ago
Let's say for a second it was accurate (It's probably not), perhaps it's because Android has a far higher market share globally, and it's much cheaper and easier to get started writing apps (or malware) for Android than say iOS. You also don't need to buy a single device from Google to get started. You can take the PC you're at and get started right away, and publish that app (or malware) without spending a penny (though I don't recall whether they still charge that nominal fee to get a developer account). Saying 90% of people root for piracy is hilarious, I rooted every Android device I owned until the last one or two, and I've never pirated anything, why did I root? Mainly for customisation and host-based ad-blocking. I can't understand the thought process of these people who think the things you own should be locked down to protect you. We should stop selling screwdrivers too in case someone's granny tries to open their toaster and electrocutes themselves, after all, a screwdriver is the pre-tech root access to all things electrical and electronic. I suspect those same people who argue in favour of locking these devices down would also say "don't by silly, my granny wouldn't open her toaster with a screwdriver, because she's not an engineer".
- stavros 2y ago
  Yeah, agreed. This "I don't want to own my things because I want Big Brother to protect me" attitude is really frustrating, especially when you can have protection without Google holding all the keys. GrapheneOS isn't less secure than stock Android.
  - alias_neo 2y ago
    It's a kind of madness people only have towards our (technology/IT) industry. I don't know if it's because they don't understand it, and that's scary, so they think it's safer for the big boys to hold the keys, but imagine if people acted the same in other contexts? "The bank should keep hold of the keys because otherwise I might accidentally lock myself out, or lose my keys, or leave the door unlocked for a bad guy to come in and steal my stuff". That's fine if you can't trust yourself to look after them, let someone else handle your keys for you, perhaps someone "trust worthy" could offer it as a service, but I'll keep my keys in my own pocket thanks.

saagarjha 2y ago

Having worked on catching Android malware, I can assure you that Android malware does not proliferate because people can unlock their phones.

yjftsjthsd-h 2y ago

Given that the vast majority of Android devices aren't rooted, bootloader unlocked, or even installing apps from outside the store(s) that they ship with, what exactly do you think is the reason for more malware on Android? (Taking the claim at face value)

seszett 2y ago

> The problem is that 90% of people unlocking their phones will either be for piracy (against the company’s interests), or against the customer's own interests (stalkerware, data extraction, sale of stolen devices). Why would you think that? Many Android phones can be unlocked, so it's not a hypothetical situation. I does not enable software piracy, since piracy doesn't depend on root. I know a few persons would install of sort of shit on their phone, including obvious malware, and they lack the knowledge to root their phones. The data extraction problem happens today on unrooted phones in a "legal" way, it's done by your regular friendly companies like TikTok, Google or Meta. Rooting enables limiting this which is likely why they are against it. If you look around on forums that discuss the topic of unlocking/rooting Android phones you will see that there is little discussion of piracy and people seem mostly driven by the will to control their own machine instead.

raxxor 2y ago

There would be no piracy on smartphones. That would require desirable applications. Those don't exist because the environment is that shitty.

xorcist 2y ago

Where does the 50x figure come from and what types of malware does it include? It doesn't really match neither my experience or pricing on the grey exploit market. Malware has a wide definition however, and if you include all the spyware included with phones that aren't sold outside China and to a degree also India, you could probably hit that mark. But as they aren't allowed to access Google services or the official Play store, it's also a bit misleading.

scarface_74 2y ago

It came out in the Apple vs Epic trial that 90% of all App Store revenue comes from in app purchase for games - mostly pay to win games. If they all went out of business, nothing of value would be loss. Then you have apps that are free clients for services. There is very little legitimate money being made by mobile from people actually buying apps

_Algernon_ 2y ago

>The problem is that 90% of people unlocking their phones will either be for piracy (against the company’s interests), or against the customer's own interests (stalkerware, data extraction, sale of stolen devices). The first point is irrelevant once I've bought a thing. Once I own a thing it is mine to do with what I want, and the company's interests ought to be irrelevant. As for your second point, that is mitigated by making the process sufficiently annoying (eg. hiding it in the developer menu).