37 ms·
Keep Android Open
- anonym29 1y agoI've got my Linux smartphone running and ready to go. VWYF, folks. I'll take shitty software and poor battery life over digital authoritarianism every single time. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
- 999900000999 1y agoWhich brand do you suggest ? Google wants my apartment lease to let me distribute free games, so I just won't support their platform. This is not about security, it's about control.
- userbinator 1y agoThis is not about security, it's about control. Of course we know, but they always spin it as being about security.
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y agoOne man’s security is another man’s control. Edit: and to be clear, I’m against this change by google. I think there is value in protecting grandma from sideloaded apps (if that even happens in the real world) but this isn’t about protection of consumers, it’s about centralised control of what you can and can’t do, in preparation for handing over the reigns to an authoritarian government. ‘Security’ either to protect you from scams, protecting YouTube from third party apps, or preventing nation state hacking or similar will inevitably be the driving narrative.
- goodpoint 1y agoNo, it's not security. It never was.
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y agoWeird micro-aggression without any argument to back it up.
- xorcist 1y agoThey are just careful not to say whose security. It's not a lie if it is to secure their cashflow.
- khimaros 1y agoi've had a positive experience with OnePlus 6 and Mobian, but if you want something more modern with a business behind it, check out https://furilabs.com/ https://furilabs.com/
- 999900000999 1y agoThis looks kind of cool, but it lacks a headphone jack... Which you think would be the first thing you'd put on there since Bluetooth pairing is extremely difficult to get right when you're using custom operating systems.
- ElegantBeef 1y agoIf you're cheap like me a used Pixel3a is a grand device.
- anonym29 1y agoMy primary for the time being remains GrapheneOS, which, ironically enough, only runs on Pixel hardware for now (though the GOS team is working with an unnamed major Android OEM to produce a handset that meets GOS's strict platform requirements). My Linux phone is a PinePhone pro, which I believe is no longer being sold. It's not great. Phosh could generously be described as "in progress" last time I used it. UIs for many applications aren't built for small touchscreens like that. I'd have to review the hardware market again if I were going to make a fresh recommendation. Librem looks cool conceptually, but they're a bit pricey, and their framing of a "Made in USA" variant as a premium feature rather than a red flag, a reputation risk, and a supply chain risk make me skeptical of whether Librem is a trustworthy entity at all, or might just be controlled opposition. That could just be me erring on the side of paranoia, though.
- juris 1y agogonna say: the pinephone has been hell over the last few weeks. Phone auto-boots whenever power is applied (either by their keyboard case or via USB-C), then the battery dies very quickly, and you need a minimum charge to boot the phone, so that means you have to swap an SD card in there with JumpDrive just to charge the darn thing. There are some mitigating factors (larger battery, Tow-Boot + loading OS from SD card, potentially some SMT soldering shenanigans), but I genuinely feel like this is a fire hazard. I -do not- recommend inflicting this on others. someone suggested (I can't lost the link) flipping the script with a GLiNet Mudi hotspot with SMS forwarding (to e-mail); I really like this idea. It would be suuuper neat to play around with the tethered model: make SIP calls with a hacked Switch with Android installed / dedicated ruggedized VoIP phone for emergencies, or justify making and carrying a cyberdeck. Personally, I'm hoping to revive my 3DS because I fell in love with the darn thing again (and its near infinite battery life). I heard you can make calls on the original DS with SvSIP, so suuurely that can work on the 3DS too. As a fellow gamer and android dev I'm sure you'd appreciate the idea. I don't want a phone owned and controlled and spied on by governments and mega corporations. I want a Gibson-Neuromancer style obelisk disk blob thing that does Internet, Telephony, and Computer stuff and uses whatever I tether it to as the human interface.
- warkdarrior 1y agoWow, PinePhone is mess. So much for a consumer device... Do they even use their own product?
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y agoThis works now, but good luck in 10 years time when the radio chip requires a digital signature from the host OS signed by google or apple and your current phone is deprecated by 6g or whatever.
- userbinator 1y agowhen the radio chip requires a digital signature from the host OS signed by google or apple China will never let that happen.
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y ago5 eyes governments would be able to mandate this to stop against the ‘persistent evils of China’
- codedokode 1y agoI remember, when DVD players were required to show mandatory, non-skippable sections of video, chinese players violated the standards and international agreements and allowed skipping those sections, and they also sometimes illegally ignored regional restrictions.
- hsbauauvhabzb 1y agoI think times were different back then. Modern times are more like China selling Playstation 5’s with mod shops: to my knowledge, they currently don’t. Even if it ever becomes a thing the PS6 is only a few years away and will be even harder to break.
- realusername 1y agoThe irony, software freedom is now dependent on China.
- numpad0 1y agoGoogle, Apple, or CCP. Problem solved. I mean, the actual implementation will be that CCP signs Google DragonFly Global Root CA cert, and Apple runs Google signed firmware, but those are just minor implementation details.
- lern_too_spel 1y agoYou can still run an Android build that doesn't require a Google signature for apps. You'll just lose access to Play Integrity APIs, which you wouldn't get from non-Android Linux phones either. A better technical solution is to set up a federated replacement for Play Integrity that third party ROM developers can opt into and a library that can use that or Play Integrity for app developers that want it to use.
- 28304283409234 1y agoBanking apps will not work then.
- baobun 1y agoI think the "one smartphone for absolutely everything" era is over. Either switch banks (there are many who don't do this nonsense) or have a dedicated Android/iOS device for banking.
- xorcist 1y agoThat's a bit overblown. Almost all banking apps work fine. You might be one of the unlucky few of course, but there's no need to scare others from running free software.
- jrflowers 1y ago>VWYF, folks Volkswagen Your Face Vincent Wants Yummy Fries Viewing Worked Yesterday, Frank Voyeur Whom You Fuck Veiled Widows You Fancy Vore Website? Yes, Free!
- wiseowise 1y agoVote With Your Francs, obviously.
- jrflowers 1y agoVerily We Youths Frolic Verify With Your Face
- AndyKelley 1y agoVery witty. You're funny!
- jrflowers 1y agoVery Welcome, -Your Friend
- fungi 1y agonever been a better time to donate to postmarket os, mobian or friends.
- endgame 1y agoAs I said in the other thread: Australian users of alternative app stores should make a complaint to the ACCC: https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/contact-us-or-report-an-issue https://www.accc.gov.au/about-us/contact-us-or-report-an-iss... In the past, they forced Steam to implement proper refund policies, and they are currently suing Microsoft about the way subscribers were duped into paying more for "AI features" they didn't want.
- shakna 1y agoUnfortunately, I think attestation is being pushed by other parts of the Australian government. Particularly ACSC.
- hekkle 1y agoI think you are better off making a complaint to the Australian Australian Consumers’ Association (CHOICE) https://accounts.choice.com.au/contact-us/ https://accounts.choice.com.au/contact-us/ than to the ACCC Tell them to lodge a designated complaint to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC). ACCC complaints are designed for individual grievances while a designated complaint from a designated complainer is supposed to address "significant or systemic market issues that affect consumers in Australia".
- neilv 1y agoNo matter how this turns out, I'm sure GrapheneOS will make a smart effort. https://grapheneos.org/ https://grapheneos.org/ But long-term, Android is such a massive code base, and was designed more for surveillance and consumption, than for privacy&security and the user's interests. I think getting mainline Linux on viable and sustainable on multiple hardware devices is warmer, fuzzier foundation. (Sort of a cross between Purism's work on the Librem 5, and PostmarketOS's work on trying to get mainline Linux viable on something else.)
- anonymous908213 1y agoThe problem is for developers. Abandoning Android for Linux is not viable for software developers who need to eat. Sure, we can use Linux smartphones ourselves, but if the software we make has a grand total of three people who ever lay eyes on it, that's less than ideal. And given how The Year of the Linux Desktop has gone, I think it'd be strongly preferable if we managed to stave off the tightening of control over Android rather than placing bets on the future Year of the Linux Smartphone.
- broodbucket 1y agoThe Year of the Linux Desktop is kind of happening. Not at the scale that the meme implies, but I've never seen anywhere near as much adoption of the Linux desktop as this year. The combination of Valve's efforts, more usage of Linux gaming handhelds, distributions like Bazzite that have strong selling points for Windows gamers, and Microsoft pissing everyone off with everything that is Windows 11, the Linux desktop has some legitimate momentum for once
- layfellow 1y agoThis is doubleplusungood. The war on General Purpose Computing is the death of innovation and a direct attack on digital freedom. If you're in the US, UK or EU, please contact your government.
- A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 1y agoIf, and I do mean if, government is a solution here, its only role is to ensure that app use cannot be required for service ( and we can argue over what services can stay app-only ).
- rlopezcc 1y agoProfit is a perverse incentive.
- blindriver 1y ago99% of malware with real world consequences of people losing much or all of their money is from unverified developers. This is a step in the right direction to keep people safe in my opinion. Most people around the world don’t understand the risks.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- silisili 1y agoThe ability to 'sideload' is already off by default, and warns you before turning it on. Maybe just a bigger or sterner warning? I mean there's only so much you can do there...
- surajrmal 1y agoThis won't be true for much longer iiuc. Look at the outcomes of the Epic lawsuit. That's probably why Google is changing how they tackle this problem.
- add-sub-mul-div 1y agoThe malware boogeyman is really paying off tangibly for Google. They've got actual fans of their profit-motivated paternalism.
- surajrmal 1y agoAnyone who has lived through the windows PC era knows it's a legitimate problem. Google has tons of data to show malware exists for Android as well. Being able to prevent that malware from affecting the lives of Android users is a moral imperative for Google. I understand why folks are skeptical, but it's worth trying to dig into the fact rather than just react blindly.
- orangecat 1y agoTo the extent that this is true, the lesson is very much not that Microsoft should have had total control over what users were allowed to run.
- clumsysmurf 1y agoHas anyone seen Andy Rubin publicly comment on Google's stewardship of Android? I wonder what he thinks about his creation and the way its evolving.
- ocdtrekkie 1y agoConsidering Andy Rubin is a massive creep, let's not have him publicly comment about anything at all, ever: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/andy-rubin-google-settlement-sexual-harassment-android-creator-310-million/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/andy-rubin-google-settlement-se...
- wasabinator 1y agoBetween this and a growing number of oems not permitting bootloader unlocking (latest being Samsung with OneUI 8) Android's "open" future is pretty bleak.
- microtonal 1y agoIMO the bigger recent issue is that Google stopped pushing AOSP updates timely. As far as I know the QPR1 source is still missing in action after almost two months (!).
- celsoazevedo 1y agoA direct link to the UK's Competition and Markets Authority, in case you don't want to go via a blog post: https://contact-the-cma.service.gov.uk/wizard/classify https://contact-the-cma.service.gov.uk/wizard/classify It's very simple to submit a complaint.
- codedokode 1y agoBefore buying a smartphone I tried to find an inexpensive model that supports open source OS, but I couldn't. What open OS support is ether expensive Pixels, or outdated models. The solution, I think, would be a regulation that forbids manufacturers of any chip or device CPU from making obstacles to reprogramming the device (using fuses, digital signatures, encryption etc). So if you buy a device with CPU and writable memory, you should be able to load your own program and manufacturer may not use technical measures to stop you. The goal of regulation would be preventing of creating digital waste, vendor locks and allow reusing the hardware. Of course, features like theft prevention won't work, so the user should be able to waive this right.
- kragen 1y agoWe just had a thread about this on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45740383 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45740383.
- maxloh 1y agoMost vendors (at some level) allow flashing custom distributions, as long as you didn't buy that device from carrier: https://github.com/zenfyrdev/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame/ https://github.com/zenfyrdev/bootloader-unlock-wall-of-shame... You will lose DRM-based apps (e.g. Netflix), Payment apps, and bank apps though.
- xyzal 1y agoNot in markets without significant Huawei and Xiaomi presence. Local banks (Czech Republic) are not using integrity APIs to keep being usable for most clients.
- Xelbair 1y agoThat small little caveat already makes it a non-option
- nvdr 1y agoMost DRM / banking apps work fine for me through the browser and you can add them to your home screen. Android / Samsung Pay will stop working, but if you have a Garmin watch, you can still pay with that.
- SilverElfin 1y agoEvery company is open when they gain from it and closed when they gain from it. The idea of free general computing needs a different sponsor. Like a country or regulations. I don’t think open source projects and private companies can defend this idea adequately.
- morshu9001 1y agoYou can't even develop without the paid dev account? I thought it'd just be for distribution. Like, you can build and run whatever you want on an iPhone without a paid account.
- lern_too_spel 1y agoYou can develop and install via adb, but you can't just tell the package manager to install an APK you downloaded on your phone. Maybe attestation makes sense to allow Amazon App Store or Epic Games Store to be installed without a warning and to allow companies like Spotify to distribute their apps themselves from their websites without using Google Play Store and without a warning. What's wrong is preventing people from installing apps that haven't been attested by Google straight from their phone, even with a warning.
- morshu9001 1y agoI get that requiring attestation for downloaded apps is wrong too, it's just this website says "it will no longer be possible to develop apps for the Android platform without first registering centrally with Google" which seems incorrect from what you're saying. Edit: Oh I get it, "develop for the platform" means develop and distribute. Maybe it's just me, but seems like an important difference.
- munchlax 1y agoI think it is and it doesn't just end there. It's develop and distribute binaries. Everyone is still free to develop and distribute source code.
- _carbyau_ 1y agoThis feels similar to Sony and their OtherOS feature.[0] Many people bought Android phones because of the open capability. Even if you don't use it, just knowing you have an out is important. And now Google is "altering the terms". [0]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OtherOS
- m00dy 1y agoThis is worst thing ever happened to humankind.
- deanc 1y agoEDIT: apologies I misunderstood that this is limiting third-party distribution. I am of course, in favour of this. Original comment: I don't want this. The App Store on iOS has its flaws, but it's a curated system that has a lot of checks in place to prevent malware. I have never felt unsafe on iOS and it's the primary reason I've not joined Android and the Play Store's wild west.
- franczesko 1y agoWhat this has to do with the topic, if you're on iOS?
- deanc 1y agoBecause I'd actually be interested in an Android phone if Google locks down the play store to legitimate actors, increases the barrier for entry and improves the quality and safety of submissions. Which this looks to be doing?
- SXX 1y agoYou should just check submission link contents before commenting. This just locks down apps outside of google play.
- koiueo 1y agoWhy would you be interested in Android? Isn't iOS a pinnacle of UI/UX loaded with most innovative features in the world backed by the most genius CEOs of all times?
- celsoazevedo 1y agoThis is not Google locking down the Play Store, it's them restricting distribution outside the Play Store, which you don't have to do in any case.
- deanc 1y agoApologies. I did _NOT_ gather that from reading the OP.
- charcircuit 1y agoIf you care about it, then buy Android phones that will support sideloading. Financially reward companies that are doing what you want.
- bpye 1y agoWhich Android phones? If I understand correctly this will be a requirement for certification, so any devices that do not enforce it will not pass integrity checks. Goodbye banking apps, etc.
- charcircuit 1y agoChinese phones, ones with GrapheneOS, new ones created to fulfill the market demand Google is creating. >will not pass integrity checks Those apps can add support for other integrity APIs. Operating system owners can fund this work to help their operating system gain marketshare.
- celsoazevedo 1y agoThis affects all Android devices with Google Services.
- ghm2180 1y agoGiven the apple v epic ruling about in payment commision outside the app store, I don't understand this. I assume Google would get the same ruling if they tried what apple did, so why bother with walling off if you can't get paid? At least with 3p app stores they could have Gpay if the app developer wanted to, but now they will be pissed and can't build a 3p app anyway since users can't install it via 3p app stores.
- jeena 1y agoBack in the 2007 or when it came out in Sweden I bought the iPhone and started developing for it. This was cool, new and exciting and it was fine as long as my company was paying the $100 fee every year. But then I switched jobs and worked at a company which produced mostly open source code. Suddenly I would have to pay $100 every year just to be able to put my own software on the phone ... This is why I switched to Android, just for Google now to pull the rug from under my feet again ...
- tsycho 1y agoI totally agree with your sentiment, but can't you still do that with Android? IIUC, you can still load apps directly via adb. Is that not correct?
- fullStackOasis 1y agoYes, you can still do that directly (I did that just the other day). I can't entirely understand Google's announcement, but it almost sounded to me like they will forbid sideloading if you're not an "official" dev (gone through their hoops). I also saw something in their statement about wanting to support hobbyists. It sounded like an afterthought.
- jb1991 1y agoI don’t know what it was like back then but in today’s world you do not need to pay Apple any fees if all you’re doing is writing software in Xcode and deploy it to your own device. You do need a developer account, the free version of one, but you only need to pay the fee if you’re going to publish on the App Store.
- bfkwlfkjf 1y agoStallman was right.
- hnarn 1y agoHe usually is, given time.
- thinkingemote 1y agoI wonder, what thing does HN think Stallman is wrong about today (and which in the future we will be proven wrong and Stallman was right).
- 334f905d22bc19 1y agoWell, the things that got him canceled were and are wrong obviously. But anything (i know of) software related was right
- bfkwlfkjf 1y agoThe "things that got him cancelled" were things he said (as opposed to things he did) and those that I've read were correct (though I'm aware I havent read everything he said on the subject).
- spacechild1 1y agoHe has written some very questionable things about pedophilia (from which he has since distanced himself): https://stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20June%202006%20(Dutch%20paedophiles%20form%20political%20party) https://stallman.org/archives/2006-may-aug.html#05%20June%20... To be clear: this does not diminish his contributions in the field of software! His ideas about Free Software have been visionary and are as important as ever. One can be brilliant in one field and a fool in another. This is actually very common among technical people ("engineer's disease"). We cannot expect someone to be right 100% of the time.
- bfkwlfkjf 1y ago
- sodikidos 1y ago[flagged]
- Artoooooor 1y agoDoes it also mean that developers in "bad" countries will not be able to create installable Android apps?
- okanat 1y agoyes.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- BoredPositron 1y agoKill it so we get a chance to see a new competitor.
- nicman23 1y agohave you seen the stupidity that is trying to develop for ie qualcomm soc if you are a small fry?
- BoredPositron 1y agoIt won't get better if nothing changes.
- nicman23 1y agohonestly x86_64 has kinda caught up with arm in power to wattage
- 28304283409234 1y agoI just bought a fairphone6 hoping this phone would last me a decade with security patches and lineageos support. Naively I was assuming Google would keep Android open for that period. Now I might as well switch to Apple so I'm in sync with the rest of my family. Ugh.
- xorcist 1y agoYou will probably run some kind of community Android distribution on that phone, like Lineage or Graphene, and those will likely not include this limitation. The world will be worse off, but you and I will be unaffected. Worst case is that future Google will decide to kick us out of the Play Store, but there has been plenty of workarounds for that before.
- WhoSaidWhat2 1y agoYou should have all embrace Windows Phone with all of its early issues.
- runiq 1y agoUnfortunately the feedback period for the European Digital Fairness Act has been closed since October 24th. Does anyone know of another way to appeal to my European overlords^H representatives?
- aembleton 1y agoWrite to your mep
- IamDaedalus 1y agoI've only been interested in Android phones particularly Pixels because I can just flash another OS and do whatever but if Google goes through with this I might consider iphones this time
- Havoc 1y agoIt’s funny how the “Google doesn’t control it it’s open source” crowd has gotten very quiet as of late. See also chromium and manifest 3
- jwr 1y agoOh, the irony. I still remember how in the early days of Android vs iOS discussions, the main point was "but it's OPEN!". The word "open" was used as a comma by Google people. It was The Thing. The Difference. Good vs Evil and all that.
- teekert 1y agoIt looks like eventually any company will start squeezing customers for what they are worth. But only once the company is powerful enough. We don't call Google a monopoly, because there is Apple, but taken together they certainly behave as one. Both create expectations, create expected momentum in a certain direction, people build (companies, lives) on those assumptions and boom, you can't get out and now the company changes the deal. Is it just our assumptions that get us in trouble? Or do we need to do more? I'm not sure how to regulate this, other than to stimulate open source, as the "for the people by the people" solution. But also that will just lead to poor expensive solutions (the market created some nice FOSS though). So the law it should be... And we're back to the problem of lobbying... Perhaps there should be contracts: Google advertises Android as open: They should sign a contract: For how long will Android be open? Define "Open". The contract can be enforced. Or perhaps we, the people, sue now, for false advertising, although that will just make them flex their legal and lobbying muscles... And they didn't sign any contracts.
- dev_hugepages 1y ago> We don't call Google a monopoly, because there is Apple We call that a duopoly, which is similarly bad as a monopoly.
- jama211 1y agoIt’s slightly different because apple is a hardware manufacturer primarily that happens to have its own OS, whereas there are many other phone manufacturers, and not all of them even use google’s version of android/linux on them, nor have to in the future. And sure google makes hardware too but they’re small relatively speaking. I guess what I’m saying is it’s less of a duopoly traditionally speaking because as companies they build primarily different things.
- joak 1y agoIf you leave under a dictatorship you definitely don't want to reveal your identity to develop and distribute an app that fights the government.
- giamma 1y agoWhile I understand the reasons behind this campaign, I have mixed feelings about it. As an iPhone user, I find it frustrating that deploying my own app on my own device requires either reinstalling it every 7 days or paying $100 annually. Android doesn't have this limitation, which makes it simpler and more convenient for personal use. However, when it comes to publishing apps to the store, I take a different view. In my opinion, stricter oversight is beneficial. To draw an analogy: NPM registry has experienced several supply chain attacks because anyone can easily publish a library. The Maven Central registry for Java libraries, by contrast, requires developers to own the DNS domain used as a namespace for their library. This additional requirement, along with a few extra security checks, has been largely effective in preventing—or at least significantly reducing—the supply chain attacks seen in the NPM ecosystem. Given the growing threat of such attacks, we need to find ways to mitigate them. I hope that Google's new approach is motivated by security concerns rather than purely economic reasons.
- beeflet 1y agoThe threat of such attacks is not growing
- stratts 1y agoAndroid already has this strict oversight, in theory, in the form of the Play Store. And yet. Personally I feel much more safe and secure downloading a random app from F-Droid, than I do from Google, whose supposed watchful eyes have allowed genuine malware to be distributed unimpeded.
- marcos100 1y agoExaclty. Play Store takes a cut from what it is selling, so they should be more strict what can be sold, not lock the whole platform.
- Yokolos 1y agoI don't understand how you can have mixed feelings about this. > However, when it comes to publishing apps to the store, This isn't about publishing apps to the Play Store. If that's all this was about, we wouldn't give a shit. The problem is that this applies to all stores, including third party stores like F-Droid, and any app that is installed independently of a store (as an apk file). > Given the growing threat of such attacks, we need to find ways to mitigate them. How about the growing threat of right-wing authoritarian control? How do we mitigate that when the only "free" platform is deciding the only way anybody can install any app on their phone is if that app's developer is officially and explicitly allowed by Google? Hell, how long until those anti-porn groups turn their gaze from video games and Steam onto apps, then pressure MasterCard/Visa and in turn Google to revoke privileges from developers who make any app/game that's too "obscene" (according to completely arbitrary standards)? There's such a massive tail of consequences that will follow and people are just "well, it's fine if it's about security". No. It's not. This is about arbitrary groups with whatever arbitrary bullshit ideology they might have being able to determine what apps are allowed to be made and installed on your phone. It's not fucking okay.
- yu3zhou4 1y agoAre there any alternative mobile OSes actively developed? I remember Ubuntu Touch was the thing and something from Firefox, but not sure if they are continued?
- baobun 1y agoUbuntu Touch is still a thing. We also have PostmarketOS (alpine base) and Mobian (debian base) as frontrunners. Supposedly Arch Linux for ARM and openSUSE Tumbleweed are also used by some on mobile.
- dguest 1y agoThere's HarmonyOS [1], which is developed by Huawei, and which has a similar mix of open (OpenHarmony) and proprietary components. I haven't used it, but it's supported by quite a few phones and sort of surprised it wasn't mentioned anywhere on this thread. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS
- fsflover 1y agohttps://mobian.org https://mobian.org
- wosined 1y ago> please big corpo overlord do not do what is most profitable for you, pretty pretty please please
- DrSiemer 1y agoA year ago I built a React Native Android app for my wife called "Pimp daddy", which she uses to track her earnings as an independent contractor. The whole concept is meant to poke fun at the idea of me "checking up on her" (I file her tax returns) and the entire theme is 80s pimp styled. Every time she submits something, she'll get a random pimp remark, like "Go get that money for me, girl!". She just rolls her eyes and ignores it, but it's what made it fun for me to work on it. Edgy stuff like that could jeopardize my account in the near future. It might just be security now, but an automated "naughty words detector" will be an obvious next step. I doubt I will invest any more time in hobby app development if I have to deal with some humorless overbearing watchdog telling me what I can and cannot install on my own device. Very sad to see Android following Microsofts anti power user direction.
- hilbert42 1y agoThe idea of offering something for free then later deliberately restricting and or reducing its scope after securing enough takers to maximize benefits and advantages for those making the offer ought to be unlawful as they are knowingly and deliberately manipulating human nature. Those who accept such seemingly appealing offers often end up disadvantaged or harmed. And here with Google's latest Android edict we have yet another instance. Manipulation and deception tactics are particularly relevant in internet age and they are Big Tech's standard modus operandi because its found them to be such financially successful business models. Laws need to enacted to prevent such exploitation as it is unreasonable and unacceptable for the psyche/reasoning of ordinary citizens to be pitched against such psychological might. As so often happens with such authoritarian and manipulative dictates, this Google edict comes wrapped in the usual paltry excuse of security. Even Blind Freddy knows this excuse to be bullshit and that the real beneficiary is Google. The time has come for Android to be decoupled completely from Google. It's tragic that despite a monopolistic finding against Google the Law didn't recognize the fact.
- preisschild 1y agoWhats also an issue is that Android seemingly has stopped publishing the source code for Android (AOSP). Android 16 QPR1 has been out for months but still no source code released.
- unfitted2545 1y agoYep, slowly moving pieces of AOSP to closed source and now silence on putting out any AOSP releases, in the name of simplifying their development..
- zb3 1y agoThey're exremely tight-lipped on this.. many people asked using multiple channels but no response for months.
- cryptoneo 1y agoThe play store ID process is ridiculous, their AI is making up BS why it wouldn't let your documents pass, clearly no human in the loop. In the EU we can report this to: comp-market-information@ec.europa.eu State that: Google is abusing its dominant position on the market for Android-app distribution by “denial of access to an essential facility”. Google is not complying with their "gatekeeper" DMA obligations (Article 5(4), Article 6(12), Article 11, Article 15) Attach evidence. Financial penalty is the only way to pressure this company to abide law.
- aprilfoo 1y agoThe EU's DMA team replied to a previous inquiry: > [...] the Digital Markets Act (‘DMA’) obliges gatekeepers like Google to effectively allow the distribution of apps on their operating system through third party app stores or the web. At the same time, the DMA also permits Google to introduce strictly necessary and proportionate measures to ensure that third-party software apps or app stores do not endanger the integrity of the hardware or operating system or to enable end users to effectively protect security. [...] They seem to be on it, but no surprise: it's all about Google's claims for "security" and "ongoing dialogue gatekeepers". Freedom to use own hardware or software, no.
- Garvi 1y agoIf people working for Google had a conscience, they would be working to break the system from within. At this point it's leaving the confines of anti-consumerism and entering into a gray area of basic human rights abuse. It's clearly a cartel market with the other big players (Apple and others to a lesser extend) that needed to be broken 10 years ago(if it were possible). It reminds me a bit of the book "The Constant Soldier", depicting Auschwitz guards and staff enjoying their carefree holiday at a nearby lake resort, before going back to burning people. Might seem like hyperbole, but I think we're rushing towards an ugly plutocracy.
- criddell 1y agoGoing full on Godwin today? People working for Google are not Nazis and people using Android phones are not like Auschwitz prisoners. That's a really terrible analogy.
- ajnin 1y agoAndroid has not been really open for a long time now. - Many APIs have been moved to Google Play Services (which is not open source), and many apps have come to rely on them. You can emulate it partially but not fully, see second point below. - Some features like device attestation / SafetyNet fail on non-"official" devices, for example many banking or government ID apps refuse to work on open source os like GrapheneOS
- crowbahr 1y agoAndroid dev at a large company - I've been talking with the folks at Graphene about options for attestation without using Google's API and it looks like there's actually a lot I can do for attestation without them, as long as I add their cert chain to a backend service. It's a bit of a pain because Google just does that for me normally, but we _can_ support it. It's probably only a sprint of effort give or take. But we're deeply undermanned so it's hard to get done.
- fread2281 1y agoWhy do you need attestation? It seems to always either serve no real purpose (e.g. Bank apps) or be anti-user (DRM) (except for perhaps enterprise managed devices for companies with serious infosec requirements)
- crowbahr 1y agoReplied below but TLDR (and not fixing myself) is that security requirements of the app are such that a compromised APK or rooted device running modified android could gain privileged access to sensitive information by bypassing/deep faking some auth mechanism. This isn't hypothetical: it's attacks observed in the wild that we've been forced to respond to.
- AlgebraFox 1y agoWhy do you need attesation? Why do you think Google should own that device and not the user?
- didacusc 1y agoIt's finally the time for Sailfish OS / Linux Smartphone OSes!
- qiu3344 1y agoIt's a lost cause. We need to focus on pmOS: https://postmarketos.org/ https://postmarketos.org/ With both Android and Chromium, we're ultimately at Google's mercy. btw, does anyone know if Huawei is following along with this in their fork?
- palata 1y agoLinux on mobile is fun, but really I want AOSP and its superior security model and SDK. Now I hate Google as much as the next person, but I also hate all the other Android manufacturers who just don't do better. Ideally, major manufacturers would all contribute to AOSP to make sure that it runs well with their devices. And then we could install the "AOSP distro" we want, be it GrapheneOS or LineageOS or whatever the fuck we want. > does anyone know if Huawei is following along with this in their fork? They suck like all the other manufacturers: they forked as a quick solution, and then decided to go with their own proprietary codebase. If nobody else contributes, why would they make it open source? What I see from the Linux experience is that the only way it works is to have a copyleft licence and a multitude of contributors. That way it belongs to everybody, and it moves too fast for one single entity to write a proprietary competitor on their own. But AOSP is not that: first it's a permissive licence, and only Google meaningfully contributes to it.
- yjftsjthsd-h 1y ago> Ideally, major manufacturers would all contribute to AOSP to make sure that it runs well with their devices. And then we could install the "AOSP distro" we want, be it GrapheneOS or LineageOS or whatever the fuck we want. I was under the impression that we got that with GSI, including that Google required a device to support GSIs in order to be certified or something like that. Am I misremembering?
- jhasse 1y ago> btw, does anyone know if Huawei is following along with this in their fork? They are moving to their own completely proprietary OS called HarmonyOS NEXT.
- pmdr 1y agoGoogle is evil. Every single one on here arguing "but muh security improves" is against freedom of computing, plain and simple. There's no middle ground. Google & others have slowly turned down the freedom dial over the years and we let it happen. People working for Google let it happen. I'm not aware of any inside movement protesting this like they protested against various social issues. Security that you can't turn off is basically a prison.
- immibis 1y agoThese things simply do not work. Things that work: legislation (when enforced); lawsuits (when successful and very costly to the company); physical violence of course; people collectively refusing to buy the product because now it has zero advantage over Apple or because someone comes out with a new better competitor; forced interoperability via reverse engineering.
- hackerredis 1y ago[dead]
- azalemeth 1y agoFor what it is worth, I submitted a (totally, different, "handwritten", personal) complaint to the UK's CMA about this a few weeks ago, when it was first announced. I received _the_ most boilerplate "Thanks, bog off" response imaginable, which I presume is a good thing... Dear $NAME, Thank you for your correspondence. We value people contacting us with information. This helps us to tackle anti-competitive behaviour and protect people and businesses from being disadvantaged by unfair practices. What happens now? Our Digital Markets Team will now analyse your enquiry using our published prioritisation principles (https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cma-prioritisation-principles). The Digital Markets Unit (DMU) will oversee a new regulatory regime, promoting greater competition and innovation in digital markets and protecting consumers and businesses from unfair practices. The CMA will continue to use its existing powers, where appropriate, to investigate harm to competition in digital markets. Please be aware that the CMA has no powers to take action or open a case on behalf of an individual customer or business (for example; to pursue compensation, refunds, or to intervene or adjudicate in disputes). We prioritise the cases that are most likely to make a real difference for people and the UK economy based on our available resources and the likelihood of a successful outcome. Can I get an update on my enquiry? We are unable to give you an update on your enquiry. We find all enquiries useful to inform our current and future work. However, we offer no guarantee as to where or how your enquiry may be used. We do publish details of our cases on our website. You can subscribe to email alerts which will inform you when new information has been added. Will the CMA investigate my enquiry? We review all the enquiries that we receive. This helps us to understand: whether different industries in the UK economy are competitive if competition law is being broken if shoppers or businesses are being disadvantaged. Even if we don’t immediately investigate your enquiry, it may lead to us taking further action in the future. Do I need to do anything else? You do not need to do anything. If we need further information, we will contact you. Thank you again for taking the time to contact us. Yours sincerely Carol Sampson (she/her) | Enquiries Admin Officer | Strategy, Communications and Advocacy | Competition and Markets Authority The Cabot | 25 Cabot Square | London | E14 4QZ So, I naïvely think one way to push this higher up the priority list and get the UK's regulator to act at least would be to look at those prioritisation principles and make the point that it falls high up them. One of them is "The CMA’s work should ensure that competitive markets provide choice and variety and drive lower prices"; another is "the CMA’s actions should empower competitive, fair-dealing businesses to compete, including by addressing the behaviour of a small minority of businesses that try to harm consumers, restrict competition, or prevent markets from functioning properly". It's pretty clear to me that Google's direction won't be going down this route, and in many ways I wish I knew about these before submitting my complaint. If you're reading this in the UK, consider looking at those guidance points and hamming home explicitly how this move by Google breaks those points – which, frankly, it clearly does (it is going to reduce choice and variety; it is also explicitly restricting competition and harming consumers!)
- drooopy 1y agoI wonder if it's possible for a consortium led by major phone manufacturers to "libreoffice" Android away from Google's control. Android (to a lesser extend iOS) has become deeply embedded in the infrastructure of modern society. It is essentially a public utility and should be managed as such.
- 0x073 1y agoMajor phone manufacturers would break androids neck. (E.g.Samsung)
- 1xtrm0 1y ago[dead]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- sharas- 1y agoJust installed Lineage OS 23 (androind 16) on my Motorola g84. Works like a charm. Banking apps work. Do I need to say fuck google? Like it's not obvious?
- bossyTeacher 1y ago>Banking apps work. Do I need to say fuck google? You are not using Google Play services? Many banks rely on the google play integrity api sadly
- liendolucas 1y agoI'm going to say something that probably will get me down votes: Why do we have to beg Google to keep Android open? Seriously. So many open source projects have risen out of real and concrete needs and successfully made their way into our every day lives. A new platform needs to rise that breaks out completely from Google. I've given PostmarketOS a go (with a PinePhone) and while today I can't say it isn't a daily driver for everyone it is certainly the route that needs to be taken. I'm still unable to use it because is not easy to break away from Android, but is a platform that I think about almost every day, because I do not want to use Android anymore and I'm willing to sacrifice certain aspects to have an open and friendly platform on my hands. And if it is not PostmarketOS then let it be another project. We need these kind of projects, not kneeling down to a company like Google and begging for Android to be open. Effort needs to be put elsewhere. That's how major projects like Linux, BSDs and open source projects have flourished and taken the world.
- figmert 1y agoThe problem is that a new project and even a fork would need buy in buy companies like Samsung. Otherwise a project LineageOS would be much more popular. This is hard to do without serious money.
- seba_dos1 1y agoWhy is popularity a concern? I'm writing this on a Librem 5 with PureOS that I've been daily driving for the last few years and which gives me a much better experience than Android could. Why would it matter to me as a user whether it's popular or not? The only thing I can think of is availability of native applications, but this would just hide the actual problem with interoperability and pass it down for the next underdog project to worry about. Popularity is important when we consider whole societies, but it's not particularly relevant for individuals. I don't need a buy in of Samsung to use GNU/Linux on my phone.
- ruszki 1y agoFor example because the wait time in the theme park which I visited can be find only in their app for iOS and Android. The same true for ordering food to your table in another theme park. Yeah, there are alternatives, but those cost you time, sometimes hours. And these companies won’t implement anything for an error margin.
- grandfugue 1y agoI don't understand the Google's move. Google uses Android as a platform to collect virtually everyone's personal info and build the profile to benefit its ad business. If there is an extremely tiny chance that people (or a sizble population) may walk away from the platform, it's not worth the risk.
- inavida 1y agoIt's Google's response to the remedies required by the Antitrust act decision last August. The timing is explained by the US Supreme Court decision of Oct 6 to deny Google its request to pause implementation of said remedies.
- ulfw 1y agoIt's time for a new non-Google OS frankly. Not sure if HarmonyOS would be the one, but I don't see a lot of Mobile OS development going on anymore
- fsflover 1y agohttps://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/PinePhone_Software_Releases https://wiki.pine64.org/wiki/PinePhone_Software_Releases
- dude0101 1y agoSeriously, is this launched by Google to keep people from doing something real? Kindergarten...
- clijsters 1y agoIt is a story I heard way too often. Big Tech creates something which is so convenient, you don't want to miss it. Then Big Tech breaks that something, makes it more expensive or uses any other means of rent-seeking just pissing of its customers. We as consumers are by far the biggest lobbying-group, but nobody really gives an f. I'm trying my way with /e/OS but thats not for everybody. It also shows me how deeply dependencies on google services are woven into the whole ecosystem - even on open source apps.
- zoobab 1y agoRemember when Apple removed the signature of the dev of iTorrent, distributed via an 'alternative' app store? Exactly the same. GAFAM are controlling what you can and cannot install on your computer. It's time for a broader law that goes beyond what is in the DMA (bootloader, OS, etc...).
- mkaszkowiak 1y agoGoogle is killing Android. Along with the side-loading changes, I'm losing the desire to keep using it, as it's no longer an open OS. What's the point of those changes? Does Google want to maintain its revenue from Play Store? Feels like a bad long-term decision, especially when Apple is releasing excellent phones.
- jama211 1y agoThey’re making it worse in your opinion maybe, but I don’t think you can say they’re killing it. It’s not going to die. I fully expect sales will continue to go up and consumers won’t care about this much in general.
- ape4 1y agoPerhaps Android could run sideloaded apps in a container. I know Android apps are already somewhat contained by userid.
- NoobPretender 1y agoperhaps the users should be allowed to install whatever they want on the devices they own? this "security" narrative google spews is weak, considering how much malware fails to be detected by play store
- wiredpancake 1y ago[dead]
- VikingCoder 1y agoPlease, just give users the ability to say whether they want this "extra safety" control on. (If it even is extra safety, but whatever.) If they don't, they can sideload, and use F-Droid, and etc. And then we can debate whether it should be default on, or default off, and how hard it should be to turn off.
- zzo38computer 1y agoI agree, but it is not good enough. They should also need to actually check for malware and other problems with their own app store, in addition to allowing loading your own unverified (or that you verify yourself in a different way) software if you want to do too (perhaps with the option to configure this, as you mentioned). (I do not use iPhone nor Android and I won't, even if they do fix these problems.)
- npodbielski 1y agoWill this impact forks od AOSP? Like lineage os or graphene os?
- 555244466 1y agoI'm not familiar with lineageOS but with GrapheneOS any off the apps don't have privileged permissions this includes the Google play services. Google play services works like a normal app via Sandboxed Google play compatibility layer. The layer teaches the play services work like a normal app in standard app sandbox. Because of that, the check of side loaded apps whether or not have been verified by a ID via privileged GSM services are not possible. https://grapheneos.org/features#sandboxed-google-play https://grapheneos.org/features#sandboxed-google-play
- lilOnion 1y agoWhat's the best resource to keep track of all efforts to make open source phone OSes? I'm looking for a new phone and it's tough with the current state of things. Also about contacting your government, what's the best approach? I'm in EU.
- zoobab 1y agoThe European Commission public consultation is closed. Maybe that would be worth adding a note.
- fidotron 1y agoJBQ redeemed: https://www.greenbot.com/jbq-is-quitting-aosp/ https://www.greenbot.com/jbq-is-quitting-aosp/ (yes, 2013) I regret having wasted a good part of my career supporting Google with the Android enterprise. They had some very good (technically and intentionally) people there, but it all got thoroughly corrupted. With hindsight the only thing that kept them remotely honest was the Andy Rubin vs Sundar Pichai turf war, which at the time manifested as Android vs Chrome. Once that had a decided winner it was a recipe for serious trouble. The only viable way forward for an open mobile OS is to fork Android as is. This is the only way to carry over anything resembling existing app support or all the work that goes into making a mobile OS actually work up to the level users expect. i.e. cameras through to hardware media CODECs and total system stability.
- HumblyTossed 1y agoI love this and I'll support it, but I know that in the end it won't make a difference. Consumers decided they only wanted 2 choices, and these are the consequences.
- markus_zhang 1y agoHow about linuxonphone.org and just dump all your financial/auth related apps to an old Android phone? Actually, better, dumbphone.org and dump all financial/auth/chat apps to an old Android phone that costs some $200.
- rjdj377dhabsn 1y agoThat's doable for now in some places. But in an increasing number of countries, payments for just about everything are done directly from an Android or iOS app, so you'd always have to carry around this locked-down phone as well your Linux phone.
- markus_zhang 1y agoYeah I do carry two phones with me. I agree it’s inconvenient.
- talkingtab 1y agoThe issue of android being open is not a developer issue. I do not mean, it does not affect developers, rather that the wrong that must be righted is to the user. The F-droid article states: "You, the consumer, purchased your Android device believing in Google’s promise that it was an open computing platform and that you could run whatever software you choose on it. " This is an actionable issue. I believe this is a legally reasonable issue. If you buy a car and then the car manufacturer changes the car so you can only buy gas from them, or parts, that is an offense. If you accept that users are wronged by googles action, the problem is what can be done about it? Wrongs committed by companies like Google, Apple, Amazon are difficult to fix because of failures in our legal system. The typical legal action is a class action suit. These typically result in large "settlements" with little real effect. Users get a notice that they are entitled to $40 but only if they jump through seven hoops. Lawyers on both sides make out like bandits. The offenders have little incentive not to be repeat offenders, just not to get caught again. This is an acceptable risk for corporations and so does not act as a deterrent. There are states Attorney Generals who can file anti-trust actions. The US government (ha ha) could file an anti-trust action. In my opinion neither of these are likely. And even if it happens, it will take years. And years. A problem with these two legal solutions is that they rely on someone else. The result is that users are victims. We are all used to that by now. Since we, as android users, are legally entitled to compensation - is there another way to take a legal action. In most states the limits on small claims actions is between $3000 and $10,000. Well above the cost of an android phone. If there is one class action legal suit against google they can easily spend the money to defend it. And the time. They have the resources to do this. However, what would happen if 1000 people filed small claims action, asking for a refund for the cost of their phone? Google is declaring war on users. They have their big legal tanks. Small claims are the equivalent of drones in the legal world. We have the internet. We have AI. Can we generate reasonable and fair legal small claims court filings for each of the 50 states and put them online to help people. We, the people, have learned helplessness. We need to learn something else or resign ourselves to simply being fodder for predatory actions by corporations.
- nonethewiser 1y agoLet's not forget Google was legally forced to open up distribution to alternative app stores and direct downloads. This gives them some baseline security/accountability that applies to even side-loaded apps.
- yohbho 1y agoThe nice thing about laws in the EU is: if Google locks it down, like iOS, we just enforce that it needs to be more open again. But for iOS, that did not work well so far, as I have zero apps installed via AltStore PAL (iOS), yet some apps via F-Droid (Android).
- dreamcompiler 1y agoGoogle got a minor slap on the wrist for their last antitrust case so now they know they're invincible and can get away with anything.
- mortsnort 1y agoI've been using Android phones since the OG Droid (2009) because I could install software on it. My next phone will be an iPhone if this doesn't change.
- jhasse 1y agoYou can still install software on it.
- 1oooqooq 1y agoreminder that stallman was cancelled from the eff with adhominem attacks. and we are back to calling free software (which would prevent things like the article) as Open-Source (which ia just donations to google and meta)
- Workaccount2 1y agoThis is likely the result of one of the most idiotic and bad rulings to come out of recent tech lawsuits. It's so painfully brain damaged and yet somehow has seemed to largely fly under the radar. Google was found to have a monopoly on android with the play store (even though you can side load other stores), Apple was found to not have a monopoly with the app store. OK. But that is not the really bad part, the really bad part came from the appellate court this past July. Google pointed out that the Apple app store was ruled not a monopoly, but somehow Google's more open system was.. The judge, I am not shitting you, said that because Apple doesn't allow competitors on their phones, they cannot be anti-competitive. Google lost the appeal. So now, clear as day, Google needs to kick out competition to be competitive. Good job legal system.
- qwertox 1y agoConsidering that Google has stated their intent that Chrome OS and Android are moving toward a single unified platform, they will essentially be fucking up the laptop/desktop market as well. The only remaining good thing about Google is their Project Zero. They have become the same shit as every greedy company.
- stronglikedan 1y agothat's cool and all, but I would just like to sign the letter from a form on the same page instead of having to email someone
- luisml77 1y agoThe discussion between open-source and closed-source is essentially a discussion between communism and capitalism. Anything that reaches a certain threshold of value to society and requires enormous effort to build and maintain has to fall back to a capitalist, for-profit, closed-source structure. That's all that's happening here. Of course, small stuff like a software library that doesn't require much effort to build and doesn't provide much value can remain open-source. I personally think this obsession with open-source software is simply an obsession with communism and getting things for free, and not wanting getting rewarded for the value of the stuff you build, etc.
- qwertox 1y agoAh, yes, the library named Linux.
- luisml77 1y agoLinux, even though you may think is a massive project and you may be right in some regards, doesn't require massive amounts of capital, human resources and paid developers, etc. to build it. Android on the other hand is developed by thousands of engineers and is a much larger project in terms of monetary investment than Linux. Linux was essentially built by a single guy. Android could never have been built by a single person or even a open-source project. It's too massive. However complex you think Linux is, its just a kernel and doesn't require a conglomerate to build and maintain for billions of users. Android does, and those developers need to get paid for the massive value they provide.
- qwertox 1y agoMy apologies for not being precise: Linux/GNU and all the BSD variants.
- luisml77 1y agoMy point still remains, none of these projects require tens of thousands of paid developers to exist. They also don't provide nearly as much value as Android does. Billions of smartphones use Android. Linux is not even used by regular people. And its precisely because it didn't have the same level of development MacOS and Windows had with many orders of magnitude more PAID engineers working on those
- xbar 1y agoKeep Android open.
- rzerowan 1y agoI think the main ask should not be limited to android/ios but similarly to the rules and regs of previous decades around agressive interop and standardisation. Asks for piecemeal carveouts whenever a monopoliist tightens the noose allows the can to be kicked downn the road when the outrage has subsided and allows for entrenchment of the status quo by stealth. Chipping away until the stated goal is reached. Just like the car/gas monopolies were not alowed to get away with locking users into their own cartels - similar efforts should (but probably wont) be taken to preserve the ability of users to do with their devices as they see fit.
- novoreorx 1y agoDon't be a jerk, if you sign this, you should sign "Make iOS Open" first
- utopiah 1y agoWhy? iOS never pretended to be open.
- warkdarrior 1y agoSo what? I don't care what iOS or Android pretend to be, I care that they are not open.
- ksec 1y agoRelated question, is Modern Android as good if not better than iOS? Or does iOS still have an edge?
- egorfine 1y agoWhat makes me depressed the most is that Google made this decision knowing full well how much pushback they are going to receive. And still.
- WaitWaitWha 1y agoI think this might be an opportunity for runner-up mobile hardware manufacturers to build their models so alternate OSes can be loaded.
- jama211 1y agoWell I’m sure these comments will be rational and balanced…
- bogwog 1y agoI wonder if filing a complaint at the FTC is a waste of time due to the current government shutdown?
- ilmblover2 1y agoI've seen this website before haha
- phendrenad2 1y agoWe need hardware. Why aren't there 5G RF modules that connect via some standard interface like PCIe?
- AtNightWeCode 1y agoThis battle was lost a looong time ago. The effort it takes to keep up with all the shenanigans of Google and that play store is way worse than these new changes.
- codethief 1y agoI wish¹ the page would also raise awareness for all the other stuff that's been going on w.r.t. Google & Android recently: - AOSP is no longer developed in the open (if it ever was) – source releases & security patches have been severely delayed lately. - Pixel devices will no longer be the reference devices for AOSP, and it seems Google will no longer release their device trees in the future. In addition, Google could also lock down the Pixel's boot loader and thereby prevent installation of custom ROMs. ¹) Of course focus is important, so I get why they kept the page short & sweet. Besides, while the side-loading topic is an issue that might be interpreted as anti-competitive and that institutions like the EU might be able to do something about, with the other issues it's not as clear-cut, I think.
- erelong 1y agotop comment seems to be on point, it's time for more of a focus on linux mobile (or mobile linux)... this has been known to be needed for years and some progress has been made on it and more can be made with more people getting involved (postmarketos, mobian, ubuntu touch, etc.)
- socrateslee 1y agoin https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/lets-talk-security-answering-your-top.html https://android-developers.googleblog.com/2025/09/lets-talk-... install an app via adb is not affected, seems that means the wrapper software of adb will prosper.
- sherinjosephroy 1y ago[flagged]
- MarkusWandel 1y agoIt's disturbing enough that many gadgets these days only stay usable as long as their cloud backend stays working. But many more gadgets, while not cloud dependent, depend on an app. Think about any number of remote-controlled toys where the remote control is a phone app. Think, for example, about very expensive bicycle derailer systems that can only be configured via app. Already I've found very neat objects whose app has long faded from the app stores, but for Android at least, you can usually find a .apk and even ancient ones often still load and run. A recent example was that for an ancient parrot ar.drone that I got at a garage sale. Since these gadgets and their apps precede this attestation thing, newer Android devices will no longer be able to run them. Then what? Keep an old Android device around and hope that it stays working as long as your expensive gadget?
- 6LLvveMx2koXfwn 1y agoThis site is blocked by the UK National Cyber Security Centre via CloudFlare: >This site may be associated with malicious activity or malware. Access to this site has been blocked by the Protective DNS Service Site: keepandroidopen.org Please contact your local Network Administrator or IT support if you require further assistance