Most active commenters
  • bsder(3)

←back to thread

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

(hugotunius.se)
2071 points K0nserv | 12 comments | 31 Aug 25 21:46 UTC | HN request time: 0.242s | source | bottom
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. bsder ◴[01 Sep 25 00:53 UTC] No.45088437[source]▶
The primary problem is that we can't build a phone and run it on a cellular carrier network. This is where legislation is needed.

Apple and Google are still a problem, but they are a secondary problem.

replies(4): >>45088465 #>>45088724 #>>45088950 #>>45088967 #
2. dwattttt ◴[01 Sep 25 01:00 UTC] No.45088465[source]▶
You'll run into a variant of the tragedy of the commons; without any kind of regulation or provable assertions from people taking part in common communication infrastructure, it'd be quite easy to ruin it for everyone.
replies(2): >>45088519 #>>45088853 #
3. bsder ◴[01 Sep 25 01:08 UTC] No.45088519[source]▶
You don't need to allow completely unrestricted access to the network. However, there needs to be a process with a defined cost to certify your hardware. The cost can be expensive and time consuming but it needs to be known and published and the cellular companies need to be held to it.

The problem right now is that even if I had a couple of million dollars lying around, I STILL couldn't reliably get a piece of hardware certified for the cellular network. I would have to set up a company, spend untold amounts of money bribing^Wwooing cellular company executives for a couple years, and, maybe, just maybe, I could get my phone through the certification process.

The technical aspects of certification are the easy part.

The problem is that the cellular companies fully understand that when it happens their power goes to zero because they suddenly become a dumb pipe that everybody just wants to ignore.

That's why this will take legislation.

4. ACCount37 ◴[01 Sep 25 01:52 UTC] No.45088724[source]▶
You kind of can? The carrier network has no way to verify that your cellular modem is a real modem made by a real modem company, and not 3 SDRs in a trench coat standing on the top of each other.

The sheer technical difficulty is what makes this kind of thing impractical.

The network does validate that a SIM card is a real SIM card, but you can put a "real SIM card" in anything.

replies(2): >>45088921 #>>45088922 #
5. fijiaarone ◴[01 Sep 25 02:20 UTC] No.45088853[source]▶
Monopolists always talk about the tragedy of the commons, but don’t see anything wrong with the tragedy of the monopoly and don’t want you to think anything can exist in between.
6. ranger_danger ◴[01 Sep 25 02:36 UTC] No.45088921[source]▶
IMEI whitelisting is common in the US at least... I think this shuts down the trench coat idea.
replies(1): >>45089302 #
7. SchemaLoad ◴[01 Sep 25 02:36 UTC] No.45088922[source]▶
Yeah pretty much. I don't disagree on principal that people should be able to install a custom OS on their device. But in practical terms it doesn't really matter all that much because hardware is so complex and moves so fast that no hobbyist has even close to the time and resources to develop a custom OS for the latest phones.

The M1 Macbook Air is 5 years old now, has an active development, lots of community funding and attention, yet is still missing basic functionality like external monitors and video decoding. Because it's just a mammoth task to support modern hardware. Unless you have a whole paid team on it you've got no hope.

8. SilverElfin ◴[01 Sep 25 02:41 UTC] No.45088950[source]▶
But how do we start a movement for these ideas? I feel like there isn’t awareness outside of niche circles and the public may not see the short term benefit. Meanwhile politicians are lobbied by the same corporations and won’t listen.
9. immibis ◴[01 Sep 25 02:45 UTC] No.45088967[source]▶
I don't think the cellular network is the problem at all - everything except SMS and PSTN calls works on wifi. The problem is the apps. Netflix only runs on a verified bona fide electrified six car Google- or Apple-approved device; so do most financial apps (EU law requires them to) and basically everything else where the app developers are trying to get money off you (which is most apps). Some apps will refuse to play ads on a non-genuine device and then refuse to function because you aren't watching ads. Play Store does its best to stop you installing its apps on a nongenuine device, but it has to support older devices without TPMs so it's not fully locked down yet. Even YouTube has some level of attestation.
replies(2): >>45089080 #>>45090621 #
10. rs186 ◴[01 Sep 25 03:08 UTC] No.45089080[source]▶
In the US at least, you could already have a lot of trouble with Wi-Fi calling when using unlocked Android phones. And it is basically nonexistent if you use a phone purchased outsiden US.
11. idiotsecant ◴[01 Sep 25 03:55 UTC] No.45089302{3}[source]▶
Oh no, you'd have to spoof an IMEI, if only that wasn't completely impossible!!
12. bsder ◴[01 Sep 25 08:07 UTC] No.45090621[source]▶
And why can Netflix ignore everybody who doesn't have a bona fide Google or Apple phone?

Because the number of non-Google and non-Apple phones is a rounding error.

And why is that? Because, except for the incumbents, it is almost impossible to certify a phone.

We could have nice sub-$100 phones (remove camera, etc.) if people could get them certified. But they can't; so we don't.