Rendered at 14:35:53 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
develoopest 3 hours ago [-]
I don't understand why ensuring general-purpose computing is not a priority of the European Union.
All that talk about sovereignty, and we are giving full control of our digital lives to 2 American companies.
littlecranky67 40 minutes ago [-]
Because the EU wants attestation for age verification, digital surveillance and censorship, not free software platforms that wont implement any of those.
pbasista 21 minutes ago [-]
EU does not want that.
Only a few politicians, some of whom happen to be currently in power, in the EU or elsewhere, are pushing for those agendas. But fortunately, they do not represent the majority.
throw-the-towel 19 minutes ago [-]
If the majority is unable to do anything then their opposition doesn't really matter.
littlecranky67 13 minutes ago [-]
Bank account register, EUDI Wallet, Chat Control, digital Euro… They might not be the majority but they manage to go through with all of this.
vincnetas 2 hours ago [-]
Well that was the original android phone idea. Get a hackable open device that you can write apps for your self. Even attach third party hardware to it for extra functionality with lots of customisation. But this idea has mutated quite a bit.
mosura 2 hours ago [-]
Even by 2015 the noise in Google was “the Chrome OS model is better” with reference to them centrally controlling everything.
Andy Rubin was no saint, on so many levels, but when he was removed from Android leadership and the Chrome culture effectively took over this was always how it was going to go.
dainiusse 2 hours ago [-]
I fully agree with it. But I think Google also understands that the platform is unatractive for businesses. In my case I just don't do Android app because I know it is easy to just take and hack. It is not the case on iPhone. And my app is one time payment so the ability to just copy out the APK leaves me not doing an app at all...
Jean-Papoulos 19 minutes ago [-]
The people that go through the trouble of installing apks from random websites to not pay $1 are in the minority. What's more, most of them wouldn't pay that dollar if they couldn't find the cracked apk. So the only thing you're realistically doing is cutting yourself off of a huge market. Convenience sells, the Play Store does that
dainiusse 5 minutes ago [-]
$1 - most probably. What about $20?
_imnothere 2 hours ago [-]
> I know it is easy to just take and hack
No you don't, otherwise we wouldn't have banking apps on it.
dainiusse 38 minutes ago [-]
It is a bit different. My app doesn't rely on 3rd party services at all. It just provides functionality.
It is not about breaking into someones account.
I just know that the app can just be cracked - there are plenty of sites that do that for android. Because you can't just load your app on iOS - this is just not possible (well perhaps there are a few percent of some jailbroken iPhones, but that is neglibile).
On Android though, you can soon see such app stolen and on some of the apk warez sites. It just breaks the model.
stevefan1999 19 minutes ago [-]
> On Android though, you can soon see such app stolen and on some of the apk warez sites. It just breaks the model.
Think about Windows and software privacy
graceful6800 2 hours ago [-]
Have you tried extracting, decompiling, and modifying someone else's app?
It wasn't hard before LLMs and it's nearly trivial now.
skinfaxi 1 hours ago [-]
Is that not possible with ios applications?
Xirdus 1 hours ago [-]
You can't sideload iOS applications. Meaning there's no point to doing any of the listed things.
drdexebtjl 40 minutes ago [-]
Of course you can. How do you think developers test their apps?
actionfromafar 1 minutes ago [-]
Normal people can't. I'd bet more people run jailbroken than bothering with developer-mode sideload.
stevefan1999 18 minutes ago [-]
You technically can sideload. For 7 days or on TestFlight
hparadiz 1 hours ago [-]
The crypographic flow that allows payments to work is straight up pub/priv key encryption with one time use tokens. It's not something you can hack. As soon you see the token it's already been used and thrown away. So whatever nonsense about decompiling literally doesn't matter.
jfyi 1 hours ago [-]
So your professional opinion is that the attack surface of mobile banking apps is limited to tokenized payments? Honestly, I'd be appalled if tokens were routed through my banking app. There is no reason the local client needs that data.
hparadiz 52 minutes ago [-]
My professional opinion is that APKs can be de-compiled regardless and that has nothing to do with tokenized payments themselves which are like you said handled through server-server communications at the payment processor level. Your phone simply sends a one time use token to authorize the transaction.
jfyi 44 minutes ago [-]
You were the one that brought up payments though. Nobody else specified. They just said it could be hacked, which you seem to agree with.
hparadiz 13 minutes ago [-]
I don't agree that your example makes sense. Don't feel like writing a wall of text. Zero justification for a locked down system.
pixard 1 hours ago [-]
He said his app is a one time payment. Presumably there isn’t a backend and he relies on App Store purchases. I know, it’s shocking an app could just be an actual application rather than a web view.
skinfaxi 1 hours ago [-]
You can patch out the payment checks if you can decompile it
hparadiz 1 hours ago [-]
The payment doesn't happen on the device. It happens at the VISA/Mastercard/AMEX level. So "the app" should be doing the validation upstream on the server side and simply reporting yes/no to the app. If you hack the yes/no okay but most payments are for physical things IRL so the payment gateway that is not on your phone is gonna be like ??? - in other words it's on the app not to trust a raw true/false signal and instead rely on server side checks. This is all irrelevant. I make regular massive purchases on my linux box where I can read the memory. It doesn't change anything.
927373912092 59 minutes ago [-]
Sovereignity of the EU regime, not of their subjects.
Why would these corrupt bureacrats give up their full control over the lives of those who didn't elect them?
yorwba 2 hours ago [-]
There is no shortage of general-purpose computing hardware in the EU. If you need some general-purpose compute to make a car, an oven, or a phone, you can get it. That consumers mostly buy special-purpose devices that don't always allow them to make full use of the possibilities of the hardware is hardly a sovereignity challenge.
zb3 60 minutes ago [-]
Show me where I can get a general-purpose computing hardware with 8GB+ of RAM that fits in my pocket and has a touchscreen.
rerdavies 21 minutes ago [-]
My recently-purchased Google Pixel 10 Pro has an unlockable bootloader. (Although it may be locked if you buy it through a provider).
And, for a nominal one-time payment, you can register as a developer, and compile, install and run absolutely anything you want on a non-rooted Android phone with a locked bootloader (within the constraints of the security system, which is, of course, A Good Thing).
RobotToaster 15 minutes ago [-]
and a 5g radiotelephony MODEM.
inigyou 3 hours ago [-]
It's a regulated market economy. Someone has to actually make the product. They can't force someone to make a product.
There's MNT in the EU.
mosura 2 hours ago [-]
Do what the Chinese did and fork Android.
The EU has enough tech talent to do it, but the political and managerial class lack both the strategic ability or the willingness to adequately reward the effort it would take, almost certainly preferring to, again, outsource the concern, and then be shocked Pikachu later.
Anyone doubting this should see how BMW think about their in car software. And that is for a supposedly premium product.
inigyou 2 hours ago [-]
There's GrapheneOS. It's Canadian, not European. I'm not sure where LineageOS is from.
BMW isn't the EU government. Like I said, someone has to actually do it. BMW Actually Did It in a really user hostile way, and that's the best we have. Why is nobody Actually Doing It but good? Or why aren't we buying MNT products?
mosura 2 hours ago [-]
BMW behaviour is perfectly representative of the EU mentality.
As is your comment. It is basically “someone else should do this properly and I will take the benefits” but not actually willing to put up the hard bit themselves.
inigyou 2 hours ago [-]
I'm talking about the government of the EU. You seem to be talking about all the countries and the people in the countries.
mosura 2 hours ago [-]
You need to parse the word mentality in context.
The root problem here is the EU is culturally broken, and until some grand disaster will simply decline ever further with everyone involved wondering why no one else is doing anything about it.
inigyou 58 minutes ago [-]
Why don't we export some better culture to Europe then? That would be a good place and now would be a good time for Americans to flee to.
throw-the-towel 16 minutes ago [-]
Take up the White Man's burden—
Send forth the best ye breed—
Go bind your sons to exile
To serve your captives' need;
To wait in heavy harness
On fluttered folk and wild—
Your new-caught sullen peoples,
Half devil and half child.
</sarcasm>
mosura 47 minutes ago [-]
You couldn’t epitomize the problem more if you tried.
ptero 2 hours ago [-]
If the govvies (any govvies; there is nothing specific to EU here) drive that process of forking a large, powerful, universally used system you will end up with more surveillance, not less.
Because kids, because pornography, because terrorism, whatever. This is too powerful an option for control freaks to resist.
mosura 41 minutes ago [-]
And this is why everyone gives up on doing anything while standing around complaining that no one does the right thing.
What is so pernicious about the EU approach is the enthusiasm and efficiency with which it stops anyone from doing anything, while simultaneously attempting to regulate what everyone else in the world can do. If they put even a small part of that energy into encouraging the right thing to happen they would be in such a better place it is insane.
inigyou 39 minutes ago [-]
Not really. They weren't saying if it existed in the EU it'd have to surveil. They were saying if the EU government created it it'd have to surveil.
mosura 34 minutes ago [-]
Honestly your reading comprehension is not good today.
They said if the government “drive the process of forking” which could mean encourage a group of academics to do it, or a commercial consortium. It does not mean the EU government take on the task themselves. *
It is self evident from actual EU behaviour that any mobile os that gets to users will be legally required to be a surveillance disaster area, regardless of origin, and the only people that have prevented this already are evil US corporations.
* edit to add, the EU did encourage many technical efforts vital to the mobile phone industry at different times with a mix of funding, political support etc. The Arm people would tell you AMBA (a standard relating to SoC component integration) wouldn’t exist without this, and yet no one would classify this as “a creation of the EU” but very much enabled by them. For whatever reason since about 2005 their strategic ability in this area has not merely disappeared but become actively wrong.
inigyou 40 minutes ago [-]
I'm not 100% sure about surveillance but you will definitely end up with the most milquetoast risk-averse bland corporate system ever, complete with 6 months of paperwork and KYC to get a certificate to sign any executable with your real name, so it will be allowed to run.
drdexebtjl 32 minutes ago [-]
They can’t force someone to make a product, but they can force someone to choose between making a product or exiting the EU market.
In practice they’re the same thing.
p0w3n3d 3 hours ago [-]
They can make the product according to rules that are imposed on them. One rule: allow privacy. Unless the privacy is not in the field of interest of both the producer and the EU
inigyou 2 hours ago [-]
Yes, you could make the product. But you're not. And neither is anyone else. And there's nothing the EU government can directly do about that.
vovavili 2 hours ago [-]
Then why are you not making it?
cmeacham98 3 hours ago [-]
While the EU and its member countries can't (or at least morally shouldn't) force people to make the product, if it was a priority they could incentivise it with funding, tax breaks, etc.
inigyou 2 hours ago [-]
NLnet funds a lot of things, few of which get very popular. It keeps a lot of FOSS gears turning but it's not making the next iPhone.
toymin 3 hours ago [-]
They could give more funding to SailfishOS, for example
inigyou 2 hours ago [-]
Sailfish would have to ask for it. Possibly via NLnet. Have they?
And they need a plan to spend it.
petra 2 hours ago [-]
I'm sure Europe currently uses the surveillance capabilities of those systems to prevent bad shit from happening.
So maybe they prefer another solution to the sovereignty issue.
vlyan 1 hours ago [-]
why do you still believe that EU is a benevolent entity?
927373912092 58 minutes ago [-]
Either a paid shill or a useful idiot.
okanat 18 minutes ago [-]
There is actually a law being made called Digital Fairness Act at the moment. However the working group hasn't finalized it yet.
Note that there are competing political groups and MEPs in the EU from far right neo-fascists, to corporate lobbyist right-wingers, to Greens and even digital privacy maximalist Pirates.
Lobbyist right-wingers are now the biggest group and they pass laws like Chat Control because it gives the impression that they do something and it makes corporations money. EU has been founded as a maximally neo-liberal union. The broad human rights are remnants of the Soviet scare and world-war trauma.
2 hours ago [-]
legastenigga 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
pitchlatte 3 hours ago [-]
yeah but processors phone home anyway at a level beneath the OS and there’s no european chip development worth mentioning. so i’m not sure real sovereignty is ever going to be possible. crazy considering ASML being in europe.
Cider9986 3 hours ago [-]
GrapheneOS has minimal, private [1] system apps so you don't have to debloat anything yourself. Manual debloating is not a good solution at the user level.
Some system apps are being overhauled, so that's something to look forward to. Gallery will be [2] based on ReFra [3].
[1] Except phone and messaging but that's the cell network.
GrapheneOS recommends Signal/Molly or SimpleX instead.
GrapheneOS or other custom ROMs don't solve the actual problem that you can't just buy a smartphone and install any operating system like you can with an actual computer, despite technically being one.
Also, GrapheneOS supports device attestation (the non-google kind at least), which is still ridiculous as such systems have no benefit to people, only to technofeudalist corporations.
hparadiz 1 hours ago [-]
Device attestation is how you can use private keys you don't actually have access to. It has a lot of value to literally anyone who wants to store tokens or use one time authentication codes. Linux folks need to implement the full stack and offer an open alternative to payments, secrets, and tokens. In the age of LLMs there is no excuse. It is annoying as hell that I can't buy a System76 or Framework laptop with a fingerprint sensor but a Lenovo comes with one that works on Linux perfectly.
dingaling 12 minutes ago [-]
"Device attestation is how you can use private keys you don't actually have access to."
Read that phrase back and then ask "is this the future of computing that we wanted?"
The likes of passkeys, essentially user-hostile ssh keys that live on your device but aren't accessible by you, would have been an unbelievable dystopia to us in the 90s.
"Linux folks need to implement the full stack"
Nah it's fine thanks, I'd rather opt out of corporate serfdom than compromise my principles.
Lots of laptop vendors do. Very few integrate fingerprint scanners into any kind of secure authentication flow, though. There are decent fingerprint drivers for various brands, but connecting fingerprints to authentication beyond basic login requires manual setup.
You don't actually need biometrics to use key material, that's what (f)TPMs are for. They're not set up to be usable out of the box in any Linux distro I've tried, though.
hparadiz 49 minutes ago [-]
It needs to come stock on every Linux laptop from now going forward period. Like you expect a screen to come with your machine. Every Mac has one now and I'm not going back to typing my password in every single time.
gruez 1 hours ago [-]
>which is still ridiculous as such systems have no benefit to people, only to technofeudalist corporations.
GrapheneOS literally has an app that uses attestation and isn't for "technofeudalist corporations".
If this is your stance it's trivial to have your cake and eat it. You can easily build your own GrapheneOS based image, which will then be unable to use attestation (because your own keys you'll use for the secure boot won't match).
And I'm not trying to be snarky, if that's the only thing, it's solvable right now. Everything else will work.
And concerning "you can't just buy a device and install is" - android and iOS are far more secure than any desktop os, and both pixel/iPhones are far more secure than any computer (or any other phone as well (we'll get the third one next year)). GrapheneOS actually explains "whys" in their hardware support faw section.
Generally maintaining an os is a hard work, so that perhaps explains why there's not many mature offerings.
mrbn100ful 3 hours ago [-]
What does GrapheneOS have to do with this?
This is very useful on OEM ROMs with a bunch of scrapware, no one expects a custom ROM to have this issue.
belowavgiq 41 minutes ago [-]
GrapheneOS has got absolutely nothing to do with any of this. LineageOS, pure AOSP, are all the same. No bloat, no locks.
The way they've successfully marketed a more involved custom ROM as a special OS to tech illiterates is very funny I'll admit.
nicman23 3 hours ago [-]
in grapheneOS you can disable or uninstall almost everything without adb anyways
nekusar 2 hours ago [-]
And Graphene OS is also anti-user by being tremendously rude about NOT providing root and using the same tired "suck-u-rity" crap Google and Apple also use.
If you're smart enough to buy a phone that supports GrapheneOS, AND install it, yeah you should have root.
And tools like XPrivacy and plugins allow control of subsystems like GPS spoofing and lying to apps.
justonenote 1 hours ago [-]
If you are technical and want root its very easy to patch a build of GrapheneOS to include whatever mechanism you want. You can even automate this to continue to receive updates.
I think the decision of GrapheneOS to maintain the attestation features and not providing user root is what gives it a fighting chance of being accepted as legitimate 3rd choice. See: Revolut and others adding GrapheneOS keys and trusting their attestation
Like or not, for most users, having root access is a liability, especially with more and more important things being held on phones . Someone downloading a photo editing app and then having a rootkit installed in the background that waits to empty their bank account is not a workable situation.
yjftsjthsd-h 6 minutes ago [-]
> Someone downloading a photo editing app and then having a rootkit installed in the background that waits to empty their bank account is not a workable situation.
Yes, that would be absurd. Thankfully, that isn't how root access has worked in a very very long time if ever. If photo editing app requests root access... you click deny and uninstall it.
gruez 50 minutes ago [-]
>If you are technical and want root its very easy to patch a build of GrapheneOS to include whatever mechanism you want. You can even automate this to continue to receive updates.
You don't even need to patch it, AFAIK. You can just install magisk, which is how you're supposed to get root on LineageOS as well.
Cider9986 1 hours ago [-]
GrapheneOS's goals are privacy which must start from a secure baseline. If you want to make it less secure yourself, you can, but it's not the goal of the project.
It's not anti-user if it doesn't add the features you want that would destroy the security of the OS.
It has many features that give the user more control. Like disabling emergency alerts, protecting your data from attackers, contact and storage scopes (lying to apps for more privacy while retaining functionality), sensors permission, network permission.
K0balt 1 hours ago [-]
Seriously question; why is the answer to this not a phone that can just run GNU/Linux? Is it just the lack of application support? I mean, you’ll have blobs, but at least at the os level you’ll have options?
Can’t you run an android sandbox in Linux?
Docker phone?
I’m sure I’m missing something here, but what?
jeroenhd 28 minutes ago [-]
Energy efficient Linux is hard. Vendors aren't doing the hard work for anything but Android. So, most hardware won't work (for more than a few hours) using normal Linux.
postmarketOS and other projects are working tirelessly at bringing Linux to phones. SailfishOS too. Plenty of Android apps even run inside these runtimes.
App compatibility relies on apps supporting (very) old Android versions, though. It's also flaky in many areas and with how few Linux phones have decent GPU support, there's also a performance challenge there.
For some apps, running on Linux doesn't work because the app developers chose to only run on Play Certified, original firmware (Play Integrity and friends). Those apps cannot be patched to work right unless they implemented their checks badly.
zzril 13 minutes ago [-]
There is the PinePhone. It has 3GB of RAM and needs to be charged daily. It's barely enough for my use case, which is essentially "I need a browser and a shell".
Haven't tried an emulator yet. Don't think I will - they're slow enough on my laptop, and I'm not interested in spending my time on reversing anti-emulator checks all day.
And I don't like being forced into having a Google account, so anything that goes beyond a calculator app won't run anyway.
Telaneo 1 hours ago [-]
Many of the apps that people need to have smartphone to access will not run in an Android sandbox. Banking apps are the obvious example.
Not to mention that the options outside iOS and Android are slim and for the most part bad (or atleast simply even worse than those).
drdexebtjl 24 minutes ago [-]
Is it because the sandbox is bad and does not perfectly simulate the computing environment of a real device?
Because to me it sounds like a cat and mouse game that Google and banking apps are destined to lose.
zb3 40 minutes ago [-]
Because this will be less profitable. Google created a cartel-like model where if you make a device that doesn't respect user choice, you will make more money because Google will share with you, providing you obey their rules.
This model is attractive for almost everyone - Google, OEMs, operators and even governments.. the only side that loses here is.. the user.
This situation can't be solved with market forces alone, it must be solved by law.
achierius 1 hours ago [-]
Desktop operating systems != phone operating systems. You need to have a lot of support for things like "sleep apps you're not using right now" or you'll burn through battery. Not to mention that we tend to expect a lot of functionality which only works when the OS enables it, e.g. the sort of app-to-app coordination enabled by Android's App Intents. You certainly could build something like that on top of DBus, but, well, you'd have to build it.
zekica 1 hours ago [-]
xdg already provides "portals" and "XDG Intents" that implement most of what android does. Flatpak implements most of the sandboxing you have on android. It doesn't have feature parity but IMO it doesn't need to. CGroups and systemd-user can prevent apps from running in the background.
K0balt 48 minutes ago [-]
This seems to be a case of “I want to use services from companies that are built on business models hostile towards my sovereignty, privacy, and rights! ; I can’t believe hostilecorp wont let me work around their hostileOS?”
I mean, it really sucks that so many people have made themselves dependent on this crap, but at some point you just have to stop buying the poison or stop complaining that it makes you sick.
The poison to utility ratio has gotten so high that it’s getting increasingly attractive just to ditch the whole thing. You either have to draw the line or accept that there is no line, and that you will yield any degree of agency in exchange for convenience.
For so many people, big corporations decide what they will buy, where they will eat, who they will date, how they will interact, what they believe, where they will go, how they will get there.
Multiple choice is not choice. It is the illusion of choice in a fully packaged life.
createful 3 hours ago [-]
I think it might be a good idea to pause updates on our Android devices, as horrible as it is for security just to prevent this from happening. My OEM has a lot of bloat (Facebook and other junk apps you can't uninstall, useless system services, etc) that mostly do nothing except provide some functionality I don't use along with analytics every minute so they are uninstalled.
"Disabling" an app does not do that much, the OS can re enable it with an update or prevent you from disabling it.
I doubt there is true full privacy on a phone anymore with a stock ROM.
kotaKat 2 hours ago [-]
Every single reboot on my lower end Motorola phone, they have decided it fit to re-enable com.glance.lockscreenM every single boot and on every single update.
It's horrible. I don't think I can trust them to produce a Graphene phone at all, really, despite all of everyone's assurances.
createful 2 hours ago [-]
At least you can disable it; on some phones (especially Chinese phones) you cannot do anything to the system services, they intercept all app requests, essentially what Google did but with their system. The only recommendation I can give you is to look into Hail (device-owner app that can "freeze" apps, a "lower level" form of disabling, see https://f-droid.org/en/packages/com.aistra.hail/) which will mean even if the app gets reinstalled on system update, the device owner app will prevent it from running.
I think GrapheneOS might have issues in the future considering that Android will be getting more and more locked down. People say GrapheneOS is the better OS when it just is hardened Android; it is doomed purely because of the Android base.
Perhaps a Linux based edition of GrapheneOS would do well, even if it will not have a lot of app compatibility. There's only so much patching you have to do to Android before it just becomes more work than good.
Despite it's name it can also block IPs and specific apps from connecting to specific servers. I use it to block all manufacturer and OEM related apps that I cannot uninstall through adb or disable. Very handy for blocking constant Chinese phone telemetry pings, as well as additional network level blocklists for ads (Pi-hole like), completely locally so you can trust it unlike a shady VPN.
I checked out your link; it seems to be a mailing list for a hosts file for telemetry? Why is there no option to just see the file without giving in my email? Not the most private.
Saris 2 hours ago [-]
I don't this is doing a lot, it only has 18 domains listed and is missing all tracking domains from samsung, motorola, apple, android, etc..
jackdoe 38 minutes ago [-]
In the next decade open hardware will win, any machine that exposes itself to be programmed by its user will be infinitely better than a machine that doesn't.
From keyboards to phones to tractors.
The appstore will die, and the walled gardens will die.
Unless they use 'for the children' to make open machines illegal.
999900000999 15 minutes ago [-]
Most people don't care. Microsoft themselves are even moving Windows towards a more closed model. Apple's in the same camp. If you don't use their official magical stores or get something that has a certificate validating who actually compiled the code, all the sudden you're using scary binaries that might do weird things to your box.
The six or seven percent of us that know how to use Linux will complain, but eventually I can even imagine bootloaders being locked down so much that you need to spend significantly more to buy a computer that actually lets you install what you want.
dugite-code 2 hours ago [-]
Ok this is not as bad as I feared, disable still works and that uninstalls any updates that app has gotten.
It was always a bit surprising you could uninstall an app in a "read only" partition
belowavgiq 35 minutes ago [-]
HN users are so hilariously out of touch with the Android world they are downvoting your completely correct observation.
I'd probably get more useful information reading Hindi Telegram groups without translating anything
tstactplsignore 2 hours ago [-]
This sucks. I use adb to uninstall all of the system apps like facebook, youtube, web browser, etc. to give myself a minimalist, distraction-free phone that still has niche apps, maps, and communication apps. Might have to look into the expensive light phones as an alternative now if this update hits my phone.
ethagnawl 37 minutes ago [-]
> I use adb to uninstall all of the system apps like facebook
I've only ever used Cyanogen/Lineage or Graphene, so I had no idea this was a thing. I'm not surprised but ... WOOF.
pid0x17 1 hours ago [-]
I had the exact same problem because I had a strong addiction to smartphone apps.
I looked into the Light Phone and The Mudita Kompakt, but I ended up buying a refurbished Pixel 8 and putting Graphene OS on it, then I installed only essential apps I need. I keep my old iPhone 12 in a drawer at home and use it for anytime I Need any apps that don't work on a custom ROM, which includes my bank app (plus, imo, it's safer not carry around a phone that has my baking data on it in case it gets lost or stolen).
The light phones are a really cool concept but the Light Phone 3 is quite expensive (more expensive than a new Pixel 10) and the Mudita Kompakt seems to have a huge amount of grievances from users on their forum, so that put me off.
Extremely "Googly" responses there. Not a single mention of the strategy of Google to include, oh, payment, social gaming, ads ... effectively building it into the system and totally disregarding the reasoning that people might want to remove or replace Google Play Services for those reasons. Just act like all that doesn't exist.
Markoff 2 hours ago [-]
Why would you uninstall them over disabling them? They make good point uninstalling is pointless, disabling achieves same purpose and it is safer. You can't use that system space anyway.
if you don't want some system app running just "uninstall" (disable) it with Shizuku + Canta on any non-rooted Android, my current phone is the first one in 15 years with Android which I didn't root since unlocking bootloader on XIaomi is pretty much impossible, but anyway I can achieve pretty much same results with Shizuku and additional apps like Canta, Hail, Shizuwall, etc.
Potential benefits:
as mentioned, Android 17 prohibits uninstalling system apps, but allows disabling
disabling apps is usually safer, and they could be re-enabled from Settings in some cases
many system apps run in the background after being uninstalled, but it's unknown whether they do when disabled.
Neutral:
some apps might get re-enabled unless they're uninstalled (or the opposite).
Potential harm:
that would make it more risky for those who prefer to uninstall instead to save storage
most of the already listed apps are primarily tested for uninstalling rather than disabling
disabling instead, decreases privacy by not hiding apps, keeping the device unique.
kotaKat 33 minutes ago [-]
Looking at the comment in the actual code change:
"If we are being asked to delete a system app for just one user set flag so it disables rather than reverting to system version of the app."
... Joy. This makes the 'nondisable' list an even more unhinged malware delivery mechanism for operators, because you won't be able to disable the carrier shitware app and it gets updates!
It's time to start cracking down on malware preloads on phones and the over-subsidization of consumer products. We need to stop accepting $50 smartphones and $100 smart TVs that are crammed with a few hundred dollars of profit for the manufacturer to shove ads and malware at you nonstop out of the box.
jauntywundrkind 7 hours ago [-]
Noose keeps tightening, the war on General Purpose Computing, the war against users owning devices intensifies. How utterly fallen.
We'll see what happens with the proposed ADB changes. Lots of no one asking for this, lots of people describing how badly their phone use will be greviously impacted, and seemingly very little discussion/engagement/justification. Maybe they'll fire the bullet anyways. https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/526109803
mayama 3 hours ago [-]
I said the same thing about waiting for 24hrs before being able to use adb to install apps. About 24hrs being not a big blocker and that it was good for security. It's all about boiling the frog slowly, 24hrs is the start and then they'll add more restrictions once users accept that. Ultimately goog would like to have the system as much locked down as apple or even more.
gruez 49 minutes ago [-]
>I said the same thing about waiting for 24hrs before being able to use adb to install apps.
I thought it was 24 hours OR use adb?
felooboolooomba 3 hours ago [-]
You will own nothing and you'll be happy.
II2II 2 hours ago [-]
Maybe they're right, albeit for all the wrong reasons.
Perhaps the problem is our desire to have everything, no matter what the compromises are. Perhaps the problem is our inability to say, I'm going to go with product X even though it lacks Y because we actually own X. There is virtually no incentive for competition to pop up in such an environment since established companies have a lead of years, decades if you consider the size of the established companies, so consumers will follow their lead.
I don't mean to suggest that buying alternatives is a solution to the problem as a whole, but doing so may allow enough niche products to survive to give those of us who are interested in alternatives and alternative to choose from.
All that talk about sovereignty, and we are giving full control of our digital lives to 2 American companies.
Only a few politicians, some of whom happen to be currently in power, in the EU or elsewhere, are pushing for those agendas. But fortunately, they do not represent the majority.
Andy Rubin was no saint, on so many levels, but when he was removed from Android leadership and the Chrome culture effectively took over this was always how it was going to go.
No you don't, otherwise we wouldn't have banking apps on it.
I just know that the app can just be cracked - there are plenty of sites that do that for android. Because you can't just load your app on iOS - this is just not possible (well perhaps there are a few percent of some jailbroken iPhones, but that is neglibile).
On Android though, you can soon see such app stolen and on some of the apk warez sites. It just breaks the model.
Think about Windows and software privacy
It wasn't hard before LLMs and it's nearly trivial now.
Why would these corrupt bureacrats give up their full control over the lives of those who didn't elect them?
And, for a nominal one-time payment, you can register as a developer, and compile, install and run absolutely anything you want on a non-rooted Android phone with a locked bootloader (within the constraints of the security system, which is, of course, A Good Thing).
There's MNT in the EU.
The EU has enough tech talent to do it, but the political and managerial class lack both the strategic ability or the willingness to adequately reward the effort it would take, almost certainly preferring to, again, outsource the concern, and then be shocked Pikachu later.
Anyone doubting this should see how BMW think about their in car software. And that is for a supposedly premium product.
BMW isn't the EU government. Like I said, someone has to actually do it. BMW Actually Did It in a really user hostile way, and that's the best we have. Why is nobody Actually Doing It but good? Or why aren't we buying MNT products?
As is your comment. It is basically “someone else should do this properly and I will take the benefits” but not actually willing to put up the hard bit themselves.
The root problem here is the EU is culturally broken, and until some grand disaster will simply decline ever further with everyone involved wondering why no one else is doing anything about it.
Because kids, because pornography, because terrorism, whatever. This is too powerful an option for control freaks to resist.
What is so pernicious about the EU approach is the enthusiasm and efficiency with which it stops anyone from doing anything, while simultaneously attempting to regulate what everyone else in the world can do. If they put even a small part of that energy into encouraging the right thing to happen they would be in such a better place it is insane.
They said if the government “drive the process of forking” which could mean encourage a group of academics to do it, or a commercial consortium. It does not mean the EU government take on the task themselves. *
It is self evident from actual EU behaviour that any mobile os that gets to users will be legally required to be a surveillance disaster area, regardless of origin, and the only people that have prevented this already are evil US corporations.
* edit to add, the EU did encourage many technical efforts vital to the mobile phone industry at different times with a mix of funding, political support etc. The Arm people would tell you AMBA (a standard relating to SoC component integration) wouldn’t exist without this, and yet no one would classify this as “a creation of the EU” but very much enabled by them. For whatever reason since about 2005 their strategic ability in this area has not merely disappeared but become actively wrong.
In practice they’re the same thing.
And they need a plan to spend it.
So maybe they prefer another solution to the sovereignty issue.
Note that there are competing political groups and MEPs in the EU from far right neo-fascists, to corporate lobbyist right-wingers, to Greens and even digital privacy maximalist Pirates.
Lobbyist right-wingers are now the biggest group and they pass laws like Chat Control because it gives the impression that they do something and it makes corporations money. EU has been founded as a maximally neo-liberal union. The broad human rights are remnants of the Soviet scare and world-war trauma.
Some system apps are being overhauled, so that's something to look forward to. Gallery will be [2] based on ReFra [3].
[1] Except phone and messaging but that's the cell network.
GrapheneOS recommends Signal/Molly or SimpleX instead.
[2] https://nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2083724696722301266#m
[3] https://github.com/IacobIonut01/ReFra
Also, GrapheneOS supports device attestation (the non-google kind at least), which is still ridiculous as such systems have no benefit to people, only to technofeudalist corporations.
Read that phrase back and then ask "is this the future of computing that we wanted?"
The likes of passkeys, essentially user-hostile ssh keys that live on your device but aren't accessible by you, would have been an unbelievable dystopia to us in the 90s.
"Linux folks need to implement the full stack"
Nah it's fine thanks, I'd rather opt out of corporate serfdom than compromise my principles.
[1] https://frame.work/products/fingerprint-reader-kit?v=FRANTD0...
You don't actually need biometrics to use key material, that's what (f)TPMs are for. They're not set up to be usable out of the box in any Linux distro I've tried, though.
GrapheneOS literally has an app that uses attestation and isn't for "technofeudalist corporations".
https://attestation.app/about
And I'm not trying to be snarky, if that's the only thing, it's solvable right now. Everything else will work.
And concerning "you can't just buy a device and install is" - android and iOS are far more secure than any desktop os, and both pixel/iPhones are far more secure than any computer (or any other phone as well (we'll get the third one next year)). GrapheneOS actually explains "whys" in their hardware support faw section.
Generally maintaining an os is a hard work, so that perhaps explains why there's not many mature offerings.
This is very useful on OEM ROMs with a bunch of scrapware, no one expects a custom ROM to have this issue.
If you're smart enough to buy a phone that supports GrapheneOS, AND install it, yeah you should have root.
And tools like XPrivacy and plugins allow control of subsystems like GPS spoofing and lying to apps.
I think the decision of GrapheneOS to maintain the attestation features and not providing user root is what gives it a fighting chance of being accepted as legitimate 3rd choice. See: Revolut and others adding GrapheneOS keys and trusting their attestation
Like or not, for most users, having root access is a liability, especially with more and more important things being held on phones . Someone downloading a photo editing app and then having a rootkit installed in the background that waits to empty their bank account is not a workable situation.
Yes, that would be absurd. Thankfully, that isn't how root access has worked in a very very long time if ever. If photo editing app requests root access... you click deny and uninstall it.
You don't even need to patch it, AFAIK. You can just install magisk, which is how you're supposed to get root on LineageOS as well.
It's not anti-user if it doesn't add the features you want that would destroy the security of the OS.
It has many features that give the user more control. Like disabling emergency alerts, protecting your data from attackers, contact and storage scopes (lying to apps for more privacy while retaining functionality), sensors permission, network permission.
Can’t you run an android sandbox in Linux?
Docker phone?
I’m sure I’m missing something here, but what?
postmarketOS and other projects are working tirelessly at bringing Linux to phones. SailfishOS too. Plenty of Android apps even run inside these runtimes.
App compatibility relies on apps supporting (very) old Android versions, though. It's also flaky in many areas and with how few Linux phones have decent GPU support, there's also a performance challenge there.
For some apps, running on Linux doesn't work because the app developers chose to only run on Play Certified, original firmware (Play Integrity and friends). Those apps cannot be patched to work right unless they implemented their checks badly.
Haven't tried an emulator yet. Don't think I will - they're slow enough on my laptop, and I'm not interested in spending my time on reversing anti-emulator checks all day. And I don't like being forced into having a Google account, so anything that goes beyond a calculator app won't run anyway.
Not to mention that the options outside iOS and Android are slim and for the most part bad (or atleast simply even worse than those).
Because to me it sounds like a cat and mouse game that Google and banking apps are destined to lose.
This model is attractive for almost everyone - Google, OEMs, operators and even governments.. the only side that loses here is.. the user.
This situation can't be solved with market forces alone, it must be solved by law.
I mean, it really sucks that so many people have made themselves dependent on this crap, but at some point you just have to stop buying the poison or stop complaining that it makes you sick.
The poison to utility ratio has gotten so high that it’s getting increasingly attractive just to ditch the whole thing. You either have to draw the line or accept that there is no line, and that you will yield any degree of agency in exchange for convenience.
For so many people, big corporations decide what they will buy, where they will eat, who they will date, how they will interact, what they believe, where they will go, how they will get there.
Multiple choice is not choice. It is the illusion of choice in a fully packaged life.
"Disabling" an app does not do that much, the OS can re enable it with an update or prevent you from disabling it.
I doubt there is true full privacy on a phone anymore with a stock ROM.
It's horrible. I don't think I can trust them to produce a Graphene phone at all, really, despite all of everyone's assurances.
I think GrapheneOS might have issues in the future considering that Android will be getting more and more locked down. People say GrapheneOS is the better OS when it just is hardened Android; it is doomed purely because of the Android base.
Perhaps a Linux based edition of GrapheneOS would do well, even if it will not have a lot of app compatibility. There's only so much patching you have to do to Android before it just becomes more work than good.
Despite it's name it can also block IPs and specific apps from connecting to specific servers. I use it to block all manufacturer and OEM related apps that I cannot uninstall through adb or disable. Very handy for blocking constant Chinese phone telemetry pings, as well as additional network level blocklists for ads (Pi-hole like), completely locally so you can trust it unlike a shady VPN.
I checked out your link; it seems to be a mailing list for a hosts file for telemetry? Why is there no option to just see the file without giving in my email? Not the most private.
From keyboards to phones to tractors.
The appstore will die, and the walled gardens will die.
Unless they use 'for the children' to make open machines illegal.
The six or seven percent of us that know how to use Linux will complain, but eventually I can even imagine bootloaders being locked down so much that you need to spend significantly more to buy a computer that actually lets you install what you want.
It was always a bit surprising you could uninstall an app in a "read only" partition
I'd probably get more useful information reading Hindi Telegram groups without translating anything
I've only ever used Cyanogen/Lineage or Graphene, so I had no idea this was a thing. I'm not surprised but ... WOOF.
I looked into the Light Phone and The Mudita Kompakt, but I ended up buying a refurbished Pixel 8 and putting Graphene OS on it, then I installed only essential apps I need. I keep my old iPhone 12 in a drawer at home and use it for anytime I Need any apps that don't work on a custom ROM, which includes my bank app (plus, imo, it's safer not carry around a phone that has my baking data on it in case it gets lost or stolen).
The light phones are a really cool concept but the Light Phone 3 is quite expensive (more expensive than a new Pixel 10) and the Mudita Kompakt seems to have a huge amount of grievances from users on their forum, so that put me off.
* https://github.com/timschneeb/awesome-shizuku
* https://github.com/legendsayantan/ShizuTools
* https://github.com/RikkaApps/Shizuku/discussions/462
if you don't want some system app running just "uninstall" (disable) it with Shizuku + Canta on any non-rooted Android, my current phone is the first one in 15 years with Android which I didn't root since unlocking bootloader on XIaomi is pretty much impossible, but anyway I can achieve pretty much same results with Shizuku and additional apps like Canta, Hail, Shizuwall, etc.
Potential benefits:
as mentioned, Android 17 prohibits uninstalling system apps, but allows disabling disabling apps is usually safer, and they could be re-enabled from Settings in some cases many system apps run in the background after being uninstalled, but it's unknown whether they do when disabled. Neutral:
some apps might get re-enabled unless they're uninstalled (or the opposite). Potential harm:
that would make it more risky for those who prefer to uninstall instead to save storage most of the already listed apps are primarily tested for uninstalling rather than disabling disabling instead, decreases privacy by not hiding apps, keeping the device unique.
"If we are being asked to delete a system app for just one user set flag so it disables rather than reverting to system version of the app."
... Joy. This makes the 'nondisable' list an even more unhinged malware delivery mechanism for operators, because you won't be able to disable the carrier shitware app and it gets updates!
It's time to start cracking down on malware preloads on phones and the over-subsidization of consumer products. We need to stop accepting $50 smartphones and $100 smart TVs that are crammed with a few hundred dollars of profit for the manufacturer to shove ads and malware at you nonstop out of the box.
We'll see what happens with the proposed ADB changes. Lots of no one asking for this, lots of people describing how badly their phone use will be greviously impacted, and seemingly very little discussion/engagement/justification. Maybe they'll fire the bullet anyways. https://issuetracker.google.com/issues/526109803
I thought it was 24 hours OR use adb?
Perhaps the problem is our desire to have everything, no matter what the compromises are. Perhaps the problem is our inability to say, I'm going to go with product X even though it lacks Y because we actually own X. There is virtually no incentive for competition to pop up in such an environment since established companies have a lead of years, decades if you consider the size of the established companies, so consumers will follow their lead.
I don't mean to suggest that buying alternatives is a solution to the problem as a whole, but doing so may allow enough niche products to survive to give those of us who are interested in alternatives and alternative to choose from.