4 ms·

I feel like you missed my point. I am fighting for the 100% (and you are not, as you say). We should all own our devices, and owning a device means that we can

by palata 6mo ago

I feel like you missed my point. I am fighting for the 100% (and you are not, as you say). We should all own our devices, and owning a device means that we can install whatever OS we want on it. The beauty of it being that if you can install whatever OS you want on it, then the problem raised by the article does not exist anymore. Today, if you own a Pixel, you can just install GrapheneOS and it will mostly work. Why just "mostly"? Not because of GrapheneOS. Because of some goddamn companies (usually banks) who want to lock you into the Google flavour of Android. If you own another device, maybe you could install LineageOS or /e/OS, but chances are that you won't be able to relock the bootloader, so you will lose the security model of Android. For many people, this should mean that it's not a reasonable option. But that's not LineageOS' or /e/OS' fault: it's the manufacturer's fault: they are locking you into the Google flavour of Android (which many times also means their own flavour based on top of the Google flavour). And on many other devices, you just cannot install an alternative OS at all, so you are stuck with the Stock OS. You are essentially saying "it is fine that 99.99999% of the people are locked into their manufacturer flavour of Android, as long as we can keep using F-Droid" (because really, the changed discussed here mostly affects F-Droid, and it would be debatable whether or not F-Droid's design is fine or not). I disagree, it is not fine. When we buy an Android device, we should be able to install an alternative OS, period. All of us.

busssard 6mo ago
well if in the 10year future new OS are as easy installed as apps now, maybe. But that future is far off. Getting my grandma to install NewPipe is easier if Fdroid works on her phone, than to get her to install the new totallyFLOSS-OS
- palata 6mo ago
  Have you tried installing GrapheneOS? I don't think it's harder than properly installing F-Droid and then installing NewPipe with it. > the new totallyFLOSS-OS Nobody said it has to be new and totally FLOSS. Just build on top of AOSP, which is open source and very mature, and that everybody knows (because it is Android :-) ).
- fsflover 6mo ago
  Installing my OS as an app on top a spying [0] Google/Apple walled garden? No, thanks. Only bare-metal installation makes sense for the freedom of computing. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26639261 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26639261
echelon 6mo ago
> When we buy an Android device, we should be able to install an alternative OS That's not freedom for the world. That's freedom for you and ten people. The bigger thing to fight for is removing Apple and Android's power over what happens post-sale. And that can include your demand, but it also includes a whole hell of a lot more about vanilla/stock Android/iOS.
- palata 6mo ago
  Only because you don't know what those alternatives are. I can take a random person in the street, show them my /e/OS or GrapheneOS phone and ask them what it is running. They will 100% say Android. I can ask them to use it for 10min (write messages, open the browser, swipe TikTok) and they will never realise that it is not running "the Android signed by Google". It is so, so close to the Android signed by Google that it's not worth "improving" the Android signed by Google! If you want to remove the power of Google over Android, just use one of those alternatives and the problem is solved. The pain points with those alternatives are what we need to fight. And really it's just a few small things that need to be regulated.
  - fooqux 6mo ago
    This is an idealism vs realism fight. You're both right in that you're both fighting for the end user to have ultimate control of their device. However, there's a major caveat here. Google's play protect prevents me from using some apps on my phone running graphene. My banking app is one of them. Yes I know there's technical workarounds. Yes I know they have a website (for now). But the point is, this is the direction stuff is moving. Fully signed devices from power-on through the entire stack and a flag that warns software if that breaks. Yes, it's a win for security. But I have zero control. Google has all the keys to all the doors and graphene can't do anything about it. Nor can I. And Google has very little incentive to change this. I fear this is the direction things are moving to. Phones will be tied to our identity. Web will be depreciated as a security risk. Only one of the two options you two are fighting over fixes this: power must be taken from these mega corporations.
    - 6mo ago

by palata 6mo ago

busssard 6mo ago

well if in the 10year future new OS are as easy installed as apps now, maybe. But that future is far off. Getting my grandma to install NewPipe is easier if Fdroid works on her phone, than to get her to install the new totallyFLOSS-OS

palata 6mo ago
Have you tried installing GrapheneOS? I don't think it's harder than properly installing F-Droid and then installing NewPipe with it. > the new totallyFLOSS-OS Nobody said it has to be new and totally FLOSS. Just build on top of AOSP, which is open source and very mature, and that everybody knows (because it is Android :-) ).
fsflover 6mo ago
Installing my OS as an app on top a spying [0] Google/Apple walled garden? No, thanks. Only bare-metal installation makes sense for the freedom of computing. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26639261 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26639261

echelon 6mo ago

> When we buy an Android device, we should be able to install an alternative OS That's not freedom for the world. That's freedom for you and ten people. The bigger thing to fight for is removing Apple and Android's power over what happens post-sale. And that can include your demand, but it also includes a whole hell of a lot more about vanilla/stock Android/iOS.

palata 6mo ago
Only because you don't know what those alternatives are. I can take a random person in the street, show them my /e/OS or GrapheneOS phone and ask them what it is running. They will 100% say Android. I can ask them to use it for 10min (write messages, open the browser, swipe TikTok) and they will never realise that it is not running "the Android signed by Google". It is so, so close to the Android signed by Google that it's not worth "improving" the Android signed by Google! If you want to remove the power of Google over Android, just use one of those alternatives and the problem is solved. The pain points with those alternatives are what we need to fight. And really it's just a few small things that need to be regulated.
- fooqux 6mo ago
  This is an idealism vs realism fight. You're both right in that you're both fighting for the end user to have ultimate control of their device. However, there's a major caveat here. Google's play protect prevents me from using some apps on my phone running graphene. My banking app is one of them. Yes I know there's technical workarounds. Yes I know they have a website (for now). But the point is, this is the direction stuff is moving. Fully signed devices from power-on through the entire stack and a flag that warns software if that breaks. Yes, it's a win for security. But I have zero control. Google has all the keys to all the doors and graphene can't do anything about it. Nor can I. And Google has very little incentive to change this. I fear this is the direction things are moving to. Phones will be tied to our identity. Web will be depreciated as a security risk. Only one of the two options you two are fighting over fixes this: power must be taken from these mega corporations.
  - 6mo ago