4 ms·

Isn't AOSP a thing?

by cbg0 3mo ago

Isn't AOSP a thing?

spwa4 3mo ago
You mean giving China control over it? (because you still need the hardware made, and it's not like the EU commission is even prepared to fix BSPs for that hardware) The EU has endlessly sold critical infrastructure to US, India and China while actively sabotaging efforts to rebuild it and now want it back - for free. This is criticized as having a low chance of success, as well as being a pretty unreasonable demand.
- inigyou 3mo ago
  TIL Google is China
  - spwa4 3mo ago
    You misunderstand, my point is that Non-Google Android is Chinese. Which it obviously is.
notabotiswear 3mo ago
Writings on the wall can’t be clearer on AOSP’s future…
- snottynose 3mo ago
  It is true that Google (de facto) controls the platform and made themselves (de facto) essential to utilizing the platform by integrating their proprietary services so deeply into the OS that you need to be a behemoth of Samsungs caliber to even attempt to meaningfully re-purpose the AOSP, and this was a brilliant strategy because it has allowed Google to solidify their spot in the duopoly / oligarchy while seeming "open". But. I do believe that Google will continue to publish the AOSP source code under a permissive license and that this code will be indispensible to a European Manhattan project for tech sovereignty, should policymakers ever see the light.
  - notabotiswear 3mo ago
    Have to throw in this 13 year old Ars Technica article as a follow up: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on... Still amazes me how everyone isn't cynical-by-default about anything Google (or big tech in general) open-sources yet...
    - hnisnotbenign 3mo ago
      Yes, I remember feeling that way in 1995-2005 about Microsoft. Imagine my surprise to learn that people still to this day trust and believe in Microsoft.
jchw 3mo ago
This app requires Google Play. AOSP alone won't cut it.
- roundabout-host 3mo ago
  In fact, it requires attestation: even if you install Google Play on some Android in an emulator/container/VM, on an alternative Android distro or in a rooted device, the app will not accept it.
  - literalAardvark 3mo ago
    Wth. Does it at least have the decency to use aosp attestation? Or are they just happy to give the keys to the kingdom to Google and require Play Protect?
    - izacus 3mo ago
      How would you "use AOSP attestation"? The point is that the signatures are compared against a database of certified builds - and that exists on Google servers. If you want AOSP attestation, you need to build your own database to compare against.
      - roundabout-host 3mo ago
        Even if they did that, it would not be OK. Free software is no longer free if it has to be on a list.
      - literalAardvark 3mo ago
        https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-guide https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-gu... It exists on Google's servers for lock in reasons alone.
        izacus 3mo ago
        GrapheneOS guy went on a very extensive rant on Mastodon when someone wanted to create an independent, European, list that could be used by apps to verify attestation. They want apps to hardcode theirs specifically. Which makes sense for them - after all, that makes their competitors break and their ROM doens't.

Isn't AOSP a thing?

by cbg0 3mo ago

Isn't AOSP a thing?

spwa4 3mo ago

You mean giving China control over it? (because you still need the hardware made, and it's not like the EU commission is even prepared to fix BSPs for that hardware) The EU has endlessly sold critical infrastructure to US, India and China while actively sabotaging efforts to rebuild it and now want it back - for free. This is criticized as having a low chance of success, as well as being a pretty unreasonable demand.

inigyou 3mo ago
TIL Google is China
- spwa4 3mo ago
  You misunderstand, my point is that Non-Google Android is Chinese. Which it obviously is.

notabotiswear 3mo ago

Writings on the wall can’t be clearer on AOSP’s future…

snottynose 3mo ago
It is true that Google (de facto) controls the platform and made themselves (de facto) essential to utilizing the platform by integrating their proprietary services so deeply into the OS that you need to be a behemoth of Samsungs caliber to even attempt to meaningfully re-purpose the AOSP, and this was a brilliant strategy because it has allowed Google to solidify their spot in the duopoly / oligarchy while seeming "open". But. I do believe that Google will continue to publish the AOSP source code under a permissive license and that this code will be indispensible to a European Manhattan project for tech sovereignty, should policymakers ever see the light.
- notabotiswear 3mo ago
  Have to throw in this 13 year old Ars Technica article as a follow up: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on-android-controlling-open-source-by-any-means-necessary/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/07/googles-iron-grip-on... Still amazes me how everyone isn't cynical-by-default about anything Google (or big tech in general) open-sources yet...
  - hnisnotbenign 3mo ago
    Yes, I remember feeling that way in 1995-2005 about Microsoft. Imagine my surprise to learn that people still to this day trust and believe in Microsoft.

jchw 3mo ago

This app requires Google Play. AOSP alone won't cut it.

roundabout-host 3mo ago
In fact, it requires attestation: even if you install Google Play on some Android in an emulator/container/VM, on an alternative Android distro or in a rooted device, the app will not accept it.
- literalAardvark 3mo ago
  Wth. Does it at least have the decency to use aosp attestation? Or are they just happy to give the keys to the kingdom to Google and require Play Protect?
  - izacus 3mo ago
    How would you "use AOSP attestation"? The point is that the signatures are compared against a database of certified builds - and that exists on Google servers. If you want AOSP attestation, you need to build your own database to compare against.
    - roundabout-host 3mo ago
      Even if they did that, it would not be OK. Free software is no longer free if it has to be on a list.
    - literalAardvark 3mo ago
      https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-guide https://grapheneos.org/articles/attestation-compatibility-gu... It exists on Google's servers for lock in reasons alone.
      - izacus 3mo ago
        GrapheneOS guy went on a very extensive rant on Mastodon when someone wanted to create an independent, European, list that could be used by apps to verify attestation. They want apps to hardcode theirs specifically. Which makes sense for them - after all, that makes their competitors break and their ROM doens't.