←back to thread

We should have the ability to run any code we want on hardware we own

(hugotunius.se)
2071 points K0nserv | 5 comments | 31 Aug 25 21:46 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
idle_zealot ◴[01 Sep 25 00:21 UTC] No.45088298[source]▶
This makes the point that the real battle we should be fighting is not for control of Android/iOS, but the ability to run other operating systems on phones. That would be great, but as the author acknowledges, building those alternatives is basically impossible. Even assuming that building a solid alternative is feasible, though, I don't think their point stands. Generally I'm not keen on legislatively forcing a developer to alter their software, but let's be real: Google and Apple have more power than most nations. I'm all for mandating that they change their code to be less user-hostile, for the same reason I prefer democracy to autocracy. Any party with power enough to impact millions of lives needs to be accountable to those it affects. I don't see the point of distinguishing between government and private corporation when that corporation is on the same scale of power and influence.
replies(14): >>45088317 #>>45088413 #>>45088437 #>>45088617 #>>45088634 #>>45088767 #>>45088805 #>>45088812 #>>45089073 #>>45089349 #>>45089473 #>>45089554 #>>45089569 #>>45091038 #
1. hnuser123456 ◴[01 Sep 25 00:49 UTC] No.45088413[source]▶
GrapheneOS?
replies(3): >>45088448 #>>45091027 #>>45093113 #
2. jetbalsa ◴[01 Sep 25 00:57 UTC] No.45088448[source]▶
Only runs on a handful of hardware, and still uses the binblobs from google for the hardware devices.
replies(1): >>45088862 #
3. SlowTao ◴[01 Sep 25 02:23 UTC] No.45088862[source]▶
That is a fair point, this is a similar issue that Libre-boot went through a few years back. Yes, you try to stick clear of binary blobs as much as possible but at a certain point you just run out of hardware that meets that criteria.
4. fsflover ◴[01 Sep 25 09:24 UTC] No.45091027[source]▶
Forces users to directly give money to Google and to rely on Google's OS underneath.
5. jijijijij ◴[01 Sep 25 14:52 UTC] No.45093113[source]▶
I think GrapheneOS focuses on privacy and security, not liberation. I think their pragmatic and narrow-minded approach is valid, it's important not to conflate their scope with related issues they are unable/unwilling to tackle.

Personally, I think a usable pure Linux phone is required to weaken the desktop vs. mobile distinction and break the lock-in. This would additionally empower the desktop platform, confirm it as baseline.