Do the most evil or something like that
Grateful for this graphene os team.
They are doing a great job.
Alienating google is not really a problem in my view, google is already alien and hostile to everyone so it changes nothing.
While my dream is to see something like PostMarketOS replace java junk Android someday, my immediate desire is to see Motorola kick Google's ass with GrapheneOS.
If Moto doesn't fuck it up by not having multiple options at different price points (I want to be able to have a flagship that can last, but want to see people that need mid or low tier also have real options). Then I would love to have a real option for ditching Samsung after so long. I just need the camera to be on par with my S24U and to have at least 12GB of RAM to help lasting for years without the old days of just feeling so slow after two years for me. Really doesn't help that the RAM and NAND likely causing regressions while prices are the same or higher than stuff from last year.
But beyond those two personal wants, it will need for Moto to be in it for the long haul as the most important thing. Not just going back to only regular Android if this first release isn't popular with mainstream buyers. Which is what I fear happening if the folks at the top and shareholders don't see Samsung levels of sales.
Samsung levels of sales?? Moto??
Nah, they'll just do like fairphone and let buyers decide between two OS's
I really like reading some stuff like that from a website that summarises a few mastodon posts and additionally adds 10 ads and trackers.
How about posting the original source next time?
Shaming Google will only work for so long. Grapheme is is doomed to fail as long as it has a complete dependence on Google's whims.
Have they announced the pivot to a non-android platform? Being security-mind it is frankly bizarre they have long ignored the Google dependency as a huge risk for the project.
they have long ignored the Google dependency
What a silly thing to say.
I'm absolutely certain that no contributors, and extraordinarily few users, are ignoring the risks implied by the google dependency.
A pixel with Graphene is the best option for a daily driver for as long as it's viable. I expect that's everyone's understanding of the project.
I don't really see how this project can "pivot to a non-android platform", as I imagine none of their codebase can be transferred.
Sooner or later the project will become non-viable and we will all switch to whatever the best option is at that time.
Sooner or later the project will become non-viable and we will all switch to whatever the best option is at that time.
Or everybody who isn't Google will have to collaborate on a hard fork of AOSP.
Or some governments will have to finally break out of their oligarchic regulatory capture and step in with antitrust law.
Or everybody who isn’t Google will have to collaborate on a hard fork of AOSP.
Along with the Google Play dependencies and Android SDK that everything is tied to. Or we could use an OS that already exists and doesn't have any of that bullshit called "Linux".
Biggest hope would be the French government to do stuff to help out Murena
Idk if i am missing someting, but what Plattform other than Android is suitable? Linux is just not there yet and people want a phone they can use easily, which graphene is and Linux is just not there yet i think
That's exactly my point, there's none and GrapheneOS are not working to create a suitable one yet.
The time to start working on plan B is yesterday
Likely plan B is fork AOSP and crossport security fixes, such features as Google deigns to put in AOSP and so forth. They can do that at any time they choose, may as well wring as much work out of the big G as possible, later is better. Remember their focus is security, it just happens to benefit privacy as well.
Here's hoping they can hang on long enough that there's a viable hardened Linux phone to take the role.
AOSP is the most secure base. GrapheneOS focus is to be the most secure OS. Not to be the best open source mobile OS or even to be FLOSS.
Notice how they're complaining only about things that could improve security, not general usablity fixes.
I will never understand this argument. Why in gods name would it be better for them to switch to a completely different OS like Linux and essentially have to destroy the entire ecosystem and start from scratch vs just hard forking current AOSP and maintaining it themselves?
Maintaining an entire OS doesn't sound like a sustainable amount of effort. Linux already has an ecosystem surrounding it that's not about to get crushed by a single corporation. The biggest issue is hardware support and security takes a lot more effort which goes against their main goal. Hopefully the rise of ARM laptops will help with the first point.
They don't particularly like Linux as a platform from a security standpoint:
i bet that thing of google cutting security stuff for pixel11 was because the government complained about graphene making it unhackable
It's probable and now they aren't even hiding themselves anymore.
According to Graphene they think it is cost cutting. Since it uses a lot of space.
But of course they would that. And it shouldn't take too long until Google makes Android completely proprietary.
Can't wait for the android with a forked bsd kernel that self destructs if you install Firefox
A boycott-divest-sanction kernel? Hell yeah!
Graphene's problem is that its very high firmware and other requirements mean they have to stand on the shoulders of giants. Their problem is that the giant is Google.
They would probably need huge resources to do that on their own, which is why they have to rely on the maintenance effort of some large company.
They announced a partnership with Motorola and said it will makes things better for them.
Supposedly. Yet Motorola doesn't have the reputation to be frantical about their firmware and security updating. Also, they are not at the source either, Google is. That also adds delay. We will see how the partnership with Motorola will work out in practice.
"frantical"?
I don't understand why the GrapheneOS Foundation can't keep maintaining GOS on Pixel devices, while also collaborating with other manufacturers than just Motorola (which is a $77,000,000,000 multi-national corporation) towards more decentralized hardware that can serve their needs while also having the ability to be manufactured by multiple vendors in a white label way.
Relying on Google or Motorola for everything will eventually lead to the same issues, which is platform lock out. I have no confidence that the Motorola deal will fix everything forever.
I refuse to believe that the most secure OS can't be installed on the most OSH.
It sounds like you don’t understand what the pixel phones are, what graphene is and what open source is.
The pixel phones used to be a reference implementation for an Android handset. A while ago Google decided to try to actually compete in the market and that meant designing hardware people would actually pick over a Samsung or whatever based on the numbers. So they put a chip in the new phone that doesn’t do emte because it makes everything slower.
Graphenes goal is to be the most secure phone os. That means they’re not competing against other Android based software packages, but against ios. It’s a tough row to hoe because whereas apple can develop hardware support for emte and software support across all first party apps and even offer it to developers in a very well documented framework then announce it in a big flashy press conference with the kicker that you can buy the system next month, graphene has to make it a granular switch system that will cause hangs, slowdown and crashes on even the aosp system apps.
Open source hardware doesn’t mean securable hardware. It’s easy to make open source platforms that are fundamentally insecure with no possible software path to remediation.
Now if you want to install some parts of graphene on unsupported devices there’s a fork out there, but it’s pretty stupid to do that since you’re giving up all the security of graphene and gaining all the roadblocks it puts in the way of doing insecure things with apps.
E: spelling
Can OSH be secured hardware? Is there a fundamental contradiction there?
I suppose if schematics for chips are available to the public, then it would be easy enough for a trained bad actor to follow those schematics and identify hardware vulnerabilities that they could attack.
Does this mean that the product GOS Foundation provides necessarily has to be closed source? Open source and privacy can never coexist?
It is possible for open source hardware to be securable hardware. Of course, someone has to design it, manufacture it and distribute it and eventually it will be unsecurable because new vulnerabilities and capabilities are developed every day, so that someone will have to design, manufacture and distribute a successor and the old hardware will have to be deprecated.
All that costs money and the people who care about security are a super small group so graphene chooses hardware that is “accidentally” securable. The reference implementation pixel phones are a great example. Google doesn’t care about security or graphene. But they built a phone intended to do the hard work of putting all the possible parts together so that other manufacturers could look and see how they could do an Android phone with some feature (or even some better feature) without having to spend a bunch of cash doing it from scratch. It just so happens that Google included relockable (this is different and more important for security than unlockable) bootloaders, a processor with memory tagging support and a big pile of documentation in case you want to use those features.
Then Google indicated that it was gonna stop doing everyone else’s work for them. There are a bunch of reasons for this and I’m not gonna go into them but I will summarize some analysis: you should make it a priority to move away from Android devices eventually depending on your citizenship and stop relying on the securability of a computer system of any type. Doing everyone’s work for them was why the pixel phones were such a good target for graphene, they had the features and the documentation. Now that Google isn’t making reference implementations anymore, they don’t intend to have every feature (notably security features) or give out docs.
So the graphene people switched to Motorola. The new Motorola phone that’s expected to run graphene wasn’t designed for it, it just so happens to have the features and the company agreed to give them the documentation required. It’s “accidentally” securable.
That’s how graphene works. There isn’t an alternative for them. They don’t have the money, capital or expertise to design and release a phone specifically for security and there isn’t a market for that product they could endeavor to sell to and get a loan against the promise of.
I want to make sure we’re on the same page: graphene is open source. There are open source projects that prioritize security. Security and privacy are different things.
ive seen the same news on reddit and lemmy. reddit was like "omg gimme that feature, even i dont use it, it is my right". lemmy is like "are you insane? just get a better platform, your dependency from google is going to kill you"
I feel like this sort of friction is inevitable. Ideally we'd just move on from Android one day, but that's asking a lot. Not completely, but something that can still support Android apps.
Welcome to the Android community on Lemmy. Here you can participate in amazing discussions and events relating to all things Android.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
1. All posts must be relevant to Android devices/operating system.
2. Posts cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
3. No spam, self promotion, or upvote farming. Sources engaging in these behavior will be added to the Blacklist.
4. Non-whitelisted bots will be banned.
5. Engage respectfully: Harassment, flamebaiting, bad faith engagement, or agenda posting will result in your posts being removed. Excessive violations will result in temporary or permanent ban, depending on severity.
6. Memes are not allowed to be posts, but are allowed in the comments.
7. Posts from clickbait sources are heavily discouraged. Please de-clickbait titles if it needs to be submitted.
8. Submission statements of any length composed of your own thoughts inside the post text field are mandatory for any microblog posts, and are optional but recommended for article/image/video posts.
Community Resources: