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. saghm · 1789767178 · focus · HN ↗

         > But they won't learn that on their own

         I think they're fully aware of this. They just don't care, because the goal of "get market share super high" has been reached, so now they have no need for it to continue being open.

         I don't disagree about what that means we should do; I just don't think we should assume they're being naive here. It's like writing a program to play chess; you should select your move assuming the opponent is smart and will make the optimal counterplay rather than assuming weakness, and then if they end up being less smart than that, you're still in a good place.

         1. brookst · 1789822263 · focus · HN ↗

            Every time the HN crowd rediscovers that companies make business strategy choices rather than immutable principled philosophical decisions, the angst and dismay are really something.

            When Android launched, making it open source (ish) was the right competitive decision. It got phone makers and carriers on board and accelerated the ecosystem’s development. Today it being open source (kinda) is a met negative for Google. So, yeah, they’re changing that.

            Well-run companies aren’t zealots. They adapt to changing conditions. If a company’s actions happen to align with your personal preferences today, it doesn’t mean you’ve found a lifelong philosophical soulmate. Ditto if a company’s actions run counter to what you want today. Either can and will change, and there’s nothing morally concerning either way.

            1. dzonga · 1789823540 · focus · HN ↗

               companies aren't human beings with morals.

               companies exist for the sole reason to make money - not to make the world better - that's a side effect.

               but unfortunately a lot of people wanna see the world as they wish it to be, not the way it is.

               1. account42 · 1789977062 · focus · HN ↗

                  Pushing back on companies breaking social norms you think are important is one way to make the world how you wish it to be. The point is to make it clear that doing immoral things will affect their finances.

                  Setting on "companies exist for the sole reason to make money" as the only motivating factor just makes it a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.