Its always good to try!

  • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    The short term is forked android. The long term is a Linux distribution, new or otherwise. It doesn’t seem reasonable to assume that the proprietary blobs in Android will get reverse engineered.

    • nooch@lemmy.vg
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      The Free Software Foundation is actively working on this (reverse-engineering Android proprietary blobs, see Librephone project). It hasn’t even been a year yet since they began, but I’m rooting for them.

    • viov@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      That will definitely be the focus. If Europe people can mandate making Android and Apple Ecosystems be opened to having real GNU/Linux or anything else they want to be able to be put on it then that would make huge changes to getting that to happen

  • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I remember the GrapheneOS team saying that they won’t bring their OS to Fairphone, because the Fairphones don’t bring hardware support for security measures the GrapheneOS team doesn’t want to compromise on.

    • apfelwoiSchoppen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Definitely feels like a supply chain issue on parts for Fairphone to have this position. Hopefully Fairphone, GrapheneOS, and hardware venders can work this out on a later model.

      • eksb@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        While his perceptions of other people’s motives and meanings may be suspect, his technical analysis seems pretty spot on.

        • Delascas@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          His technical chops are without question. However he has been so over the top obnoxious to MANY other leaders in the privacy space. He really hurts his own cause by refusing to acknowledge there are other threat models that can be solved with other answers.

          • Arcanoloth@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Let’s call a spade a spade: He is a raging asshole with severe clinical paranoia. I’m literally certain that if he saw this post he’d accuse me of being a shill for calyxos and to never fucking again interact with any grapheneos account. Both have happened to me before (Hence I refuse to ever interact with his troupe again, even though I use graphene and agree with the vast majority of its technical decisions; I have also stopped actively recommending it to anyone, the social media experience is simply way too attrocious).

          • favoredponcho@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            Agree, he’s a bit paranoid and delusional. I think that may speak to his psychological profile. Who designs an impenetrable OS except someone who is a little paranoid?

    • viov@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Sure would be the toppiest of tops!

      We can encourage them to work together in their official communication channels too!

      Would be good for both of them on every level. GrapheneOS learning to make their own phones, and Fairphone learning to make an OS while both being partnered

      Edit: Be the change you want to see everybody!! Flood the gates with what we want!

      • illi@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Afaik Fairphone is not interested in implementing some security features that GrapheneOS people consider a deal breaker

        • viov@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I wonder why they don’t want to, its not really in Fairphones to not do that

          • skarn@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            They are talking about specific hardware features. Which would of course be great, but you can imagine how they are not exactly at the toppiest toppy top of Fairphone’s priorities, when they are still struggling to be taken seriously by your mainstream Android buyer.

            Consider that every hardware features is extra hard for Fairphone, on account of their very specific commitments to materials sourcing, labor practices, and longer term support.

            They are a company with a lot of very complicated demands, for a still very low volume of sold devices. They need to pick their battles, and clearly being blessed by the church of Graphene can’t be that high a priority.

      • thomasshikari@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        Graphene already has a partnership with Motorola now so the assumption is some time (I’ve seen 2027 speculated) we may get a Graphene Phone from Motorola. Mixed feelings about them partnering with a company like that but we’ll see how it goes. I still keep thinking about finally getting a secondhand pixel 10 so I can switch to Graphene from apple.

        • viov@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I would recommend it. Very worth it overall (As a user of a similar Pixel phone)

          What are your use cases?

          • Skankhunt420@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            They are just saying that e/OS has delays of important updates that lag. Which the fairphine team then pretty much confirmed.

            Am I a dick for pointing out factual information? Are they? When it comes to something like security and privacy there should be no compromises. The truth should be heard.

            • Creat@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              Yes, and I don’t know if it could even be classed as a collaboration. They just buy them and resell them with different firmware, basically?

              I assume some part of acceptance is required for that in practice, but it isn’t like Fairphone ever advertised them as an official option (as far as I can tell or saw).

              • ThyTTY@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Well, Fairphone sells phones with e/OS preinstalled on their website so at the very least they like each other

              • HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                So instead of seeing an opportunity to do the same, they burned bridges with one of the only companies not locking down their OS?

                • Jako302@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Security wise Fairphone isn’t up to GOS standards, so a collaboration wasn’t on the table either way.

                  If said standards are reasonable is a difficult thing to say. A few years ago I would’ve said that a normal person doesn’t need to be concerned that the police tries to break into their phone, but with the current state of things and the increasing rise of fascism, I’m not so certain anymore.

          • eldavi@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            the graphene people never fail to stir pot. lol

            they not wrong, but there’s better ways to inform other people.

      • favoredponcho@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Their gripe seems more to do with eOS, but they kinda couple them together. Hardware-wise fairphone is only deficient in its security chip. I do agree with GrapheneOS in criticisms of eOS’s philosophy and security and privacy goals. The founder of eOS is a prick.

      • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        GrapheOS doesn’t like anyone. I don’t even think they should be treated as part of open phone community. They are hostile to everything that they didn’t make.

        • Nebby@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          They are hostile to those who dont genuinely care about privacy and security like fairphone and murena who also spend time spreading hate and disinformation about grapheneos and the devs and owner

          • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            I all for spreading hate of graphene os devs* but I don’t think Fairphone is doing anything like that. Any proof?

            *Just kidding. I think they are toxic but and their opinions on many topics should be ignored but there’s no need to hate anyone.

      • thomasshikari@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        In what way(s)? There are a lot of things I like about it from the research I did. I only didn’t get one because of e/OS and the battery life.

    • NekuSoul@lemmy.nekusoul.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Exactly. This was less important before the internet got ubiquitous, but nowadays, when manufacturers can screw you remotely, it’s very important.

      This kind of vertical integration, where a single entity controls both hardware and software shouldn’t exist.

    • racoon@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      It was very disappointing to find out that GOS was incompatible with every phone brand but one. It is coherent with the Zeitgeist: why care about security and privacy when users will dump all their information in Google and Facebook?

      • matlag@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        That’s borderline with the purity fallacy: that one should not deserve privacy and security because of one or more bad practice.

        I believe not so many people give away “everything”, and many more probably don’t realize how much they give.

        There are many reasons one would keep a FB account, or a Google account around. That does not mean that person abandoned all rights on privacy and even less on security.

        And how would you recommend a soft transition if you’re in a all-or-nothing approach? One day on Google, FB, what’s not, and in an instant: new device, new OS, drop everything at once? Nearly no one will do that.

        The reason GOS does not support more devices is not because of where other brands vs privacy and security, it’s a pure hardware requirements they don’t meet. If the Motorola devices are a commercial success, most likely other phone makers will be interested.

        • racoon@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          the Motorola devices are a commercial success, most likely other phone makers will be interested.

          That’s not going to happen because Samsung earns more selling private data than selling phones

    • sunstoned@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s not how hardware works, like at all. I agree with the spirit of what you’re asking for but you can’t just wave a magic wand and put any software on any hardware.

      • Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The problem is that even if somebody out there is willing to go to the work of making device drives, bootloaders and OS releases for the hardware, it still can’t happen because the information about how to talk to the hardware isn’t open, same thing for the bootloader and even if those things are reverse engineered often even the ability to install an OS there is locked down on the hardware.

        As you correctly say, the dream of any software just running anywhere isn’t possible because that’s not how hardware works, but the current situation is not one were what’s blocking it isn’t just the natural architectural structure of hardware, it’s one where the hardware makers have purposefully and to quite an extreme level locked down their hardware so that even if people are willing to do the work of doing what it takes to run an OS there, they can’t because necessary info to use the hardware isn’t available and the hardware is even locked down against OS installations for those who don’t have the necessary cryptographic keys.

  • parson0@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    And I encourage everyone to write to banks and other service providers to provide apks directly or through F-Droid

    • AHemlocksLie@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      We might be able to get them to provide APKs with some luck and finesse, but I unfortunately don’t see them publishing to F-Droid. F-Droid actually builds your APK from source themselves, and I don’t see banks giving up the source any time soon.

      Actually, as I’m thinking about it, that may be true for F-Droid’s main repo, but I know other repos exist, so maybe they could host their own that you would just add to your F-Droid’s repo list?

  • pineapple@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Fairphone? perhaps. Samsung? hell naw. Samsung heavily benefits from the spyware it builds into One UI and 99% of its user base do not care about the spyware.
    But I do hope hope that Fairphone begins to embrace Linux support.

    • matlag@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Per GOS: Samsung has almost all hardware requirements to support GOS except… they purposely cripple their device upon installation of a third party OS. One can only suspect they indeed make money with their spyware stack!

  • Big Baby Thor@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It 👏 should 👏 be 👏 the 👏 law 👏 .

    I don’t know how they managed to sneak locking a system to a single boot loader. And what about Qualcomm chips? They have a hypervisor OS, you say? A small operating system that can read all your memory? Updated as firmware?

    Great, forcibly open source that system as well and tell them once and for all that they can fuck off. No, you don’t get to control another persons property - you disgusting goblin.

    Either that, or ban the sale of such devices permanently across Europe.

    • viov@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      That too! I covered that in another of my recent posts on the Europe community on here

      That is a big thing Europe can at least make happen and in Asian/African/Latin countries too.

      I like your addition though that is all facts!! Let’s keep pushing countries to make that happen.

      To make them undo what Google is trying to do currently and what Apple does for long time to have all those devices be fully changeable for the OS

      Needs to become a movement everywhere!!! Just as StooKillingGames, and the KeepAndroidOpen movements

      We need a catchy name for it

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Can you give me some reading on this? I am happy to make noise about an issue once I understand it.

      • Big Baby Thor@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        There’s a lot of writing and history behind open source, open firmware and even open hardware, but the BIGGEST thing you can focus on is the transition from PCs to smartphones around the 2000s.

        We went from you installing whatever boot loader and operating system that could run on your device, to a locked down boot loader that would only load the vendors operating system.

        They hide behind security through obscurity, but it’s been debunked. The boot loader and even firmwares of devices have in certain cases been found to be gushing gashes of CVEs and bad coding - but only through decompilation and reverse engineering. In fact, after the 5 year warranty of your device is up, you should consider the security of your device highly suspect.

        The true purpose for an exclusive locked down boot loader is to maintain operating system monopoly, force uninstallable apps/services on a user, to then be able to track & canvas the user to sell on the data brokerage market - not to mention planned obsolescence, because if you can’t freely modify and update your firmware and/or boatloader, you could secure it for more than 5 years.

        For a more balanced take and to see “both sides”, read this

        Other than that, the LibreBoot mailing list will help you to unearth the hypocrisy and lies fed to us by hardware vendors.

        Free the firmware, free the bootloader, free the operating system, free the drivers, free the software - and then the user can decide wether or not they want to run commercial software on top of all this.

        Anything else is subservience.

        • Squizzy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Thanks for this, I am interested in the philosophy around FOSS, I am tech illiterate basically and like foss because I trust it more than US tech.

  • Mio@feddit.nu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    It would be nice to buy a phone that officially support GrapheneOS. I dont want to thinker with phones. I can image it is going to be the same experience as going from Windows to Linux. Things would actually work in a good way as a user wants to instead of locked down requirements.