Thread

1. wps · 1789760710 · focus · HN ↗

   The amount of roadblocks Google is putting up for GrapheneOS is just ridiculous. None of their decisions make any sense, from the delayed source patches upstream, to the embargos, attestation issues, etc. Google simply regrets android being open source.

   1. godelski · 1789763541 · focus · HN ↗

      I hope people remember this when advocating for chromium. Just because it is open source doesn't mean they don't control it. We need to start the long process of hard forking now or turn to alternatives like Firefox as a new foundation.

        > Google simply regrets android being open source.
      

      Android wouldn't be what it is if it wasn't open source. With all the work from outside Google. The same is true chrome.

      But they won't learn that on their own. They are breaking the deals. So we move. We force their hand

      1. StilesCrisis · 1789766362 · focus · HN ↗

         Hard forking doesn't solve the problem of closed source.

         If the goal of a hard fork is "the community will invest equal resources that Google does today" then you wildly underestimate how many engineers work on Chrome.

         1. redeeman · 1789771758 · focus · HN ↗

            but perhaps we dont need several gigabytes compressed code to have a browser. perhaps what google have been doing is an utter abomination?

            1. atomicnumber3 · 1789772637 · focus · HN ↗

               This is cool until Google doesn't load in your free browser.

               1. bossyTeacher · 1789772841 · focus · HN ↗

                  Then, you use this: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;duckduckgo.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;duckduckgo.com&#x2F;

                  Actually, use it now.

                  1. drnick1 · 1789791102 · focus · HN ↗

                     This. Also, use OSM for maps and run your own SMTP server, if you can. Nobody should need Google.

                     1. hobo123 · 1789819511 · focus · HN ↗

                        Sadly, the to me most important parts of Maps are live navigation and live traffic status. I&#x27;m assuming you can&#x27;t get those with osm (yet).

                        The actual maps are much better in osm than in Google.

                        1. drnick1 · 1789833375 · focus · HN ↗

                           OsmAnd does have live navigation as far as I understand it (turn-by-turn directions), but no live traffic status, because for that you a lot of drivers willing to surrender their location&#x2F;sensor data. Anything &quot;live&quot; cannot be privacy respecting. I never found live traffic information particularly worthwhile to be honest.

                           1. tancop · 1789836478 · focus · HN ↗

                              Maybe it&#x27;s time to give up privacy absolutism and add strictly opt in live data features.

                              That reminds me, place reviews using ATProto. Kinda surprised that no map client jumped on that when it&#x27;s the exact thing you need to replace a centralized service. A lot of people use Google Maps to find businesses more than directions.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.