That really does not address my concerns, not one bit.
Yeah I’ve decided I’m switching to GrapheneOS at the end of the month. I got my phone for free from my carrier, and while it’s not locked in any way, I don’t wanna risk them seeing the phone any differently before the “please keep it on our network for 90 days” condition is fulfilled.
Not meant to. Its all a grift to charge rent. Donate to a good fork of droid.
Pinephone and other options are looking really good right now.
A secret list of who is approved and who is banned. Yeah, I understand anonymity is good, but the list won’t actually be secret, but pretending it’s secret will help hide Google’s censorship moves.
I can take a wild guess on what devs and projects are on google’s internal blacklist…
deleted by creator
It’s crazy. And yet it’s so expected. And I feel so powerless. I’d be able to adb install but we need wide access to open source tools now more than ever. Especially tools for organizing. And that seems to be what they’re targetting. 😔
deleted by creator
A substantial amount of open source devs will probably just give up working on their projects if they can no longer be installed by most users.
That will also affect Graphene users.
Graphene will also only work until Google one day says “You know what… No!” and stops allowing it on their (new) hardware. I don’t think that’s far in the future.
That is exactly why the GrapheneOS team is already in talks with an Android OEM.
This potential cooperation only buys time and doesn’t solve the core dependency: if Google ever discontinues AOSP, both GrapheneOS and any OEM partners would face the same dead end.
deleted by creator
I can. My family can’t and most people we need probably couldn’t either. That’s what I mean by wide availability of open source tools needed for organizing. And that’s what their aim is. Make it difficult enough for most who’d need such tools so they just don’t do it.
deleted by creator
Today’s repairmen, hobbyists, developers, and technicians may end up being tomorrow’s champions of ensuring one can own what they use.
That’s what true FOSS projects taught us, right?
deleted by creator
What we really need is competent government oversight that would prevent this outright as monopolist. There’s no chance of the current US doing that, but it could come from the European Union. That has become the only governmental entity that is still interested in protected individuals from predatory corporations.
Failing that, I’m wondering if we could establish an organization of “designated developers”. People who volunteer to become the contact point for various applications, whether or not they are actually involved in developing them.
The other thing that might eventually help is to sue Google, on a massive scale, every time they leak developer info. The leaks are going to happen. If they become expensive enough it could force change. Of course, that kind of after-the-fact attack is not likely to revive the development efforts that will have already been destroyed.
Well one thing to keep in mind is that a new OS could arise out of necessity to maintain software independence from the US - China has already done so with HarmonyOS (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/HarmonyOS), and I would be very surprised if something similar never arises from another nation or collective in the future.
Of course the ultimate casualty is that we are moving towards a de-globalized future in the US’s flailing attempts to prevent it. I wonder how strong app compatibility will be across platforms in a few years.
Evil ass hybrid alphabet - Mossad agency
