Why does Google allow GrapheneOS to be installed on their phones?

evalda

Amazingly enough Google embraces research... At the end of the day it helps them to keep competitive edge in security

djtrik

Thank you for asking this question. I have pondered this myself. It's a cool thing to start an Open Source project but to produce unlocked hardware that allows communities to remove the primary revenue stream from it is something unique and we shouldn't take it for granted. Otherwise we'd be left with mediocre hardware devices.

abcZ

djtrik Not only should it be taken advantage of, it should be INSISTED upon. People in general need to smarten up and DEMAND more freedom. The revenue stream from selling a phone is the payment made for selling the phone. It should not be tied to services. If you want to create a revenue stream from providing services, then you should actually provide a good service that people choose to use.

Graphite

abcZ

Everyone should remember the core business model is DATA, not hardware. Open Source or not, Google services are still required for a lot of functional things, so they still maintain their business model.

abcZ

Graphite It doesn't matter what "core business" is. They choose to sell a phone, then that's the nature of THAT business.

But no, gooble services are NOT required for ANYTHING.
Some other software has simply made the poor choice of depending on it when they really shouldn't.

Graphite

abcZ

It's like selling printers. The REAL business model is selling ink cartridges.
We'd all prefer simple one-time transactions, but the reality is that the business model is recurring and we are the product, even if we buy a hardware.

Required may not be the best word. Dependent on, is much more accurate yes. Many software developers create apps for "free", and thus make their apps dependent on google services as a source of revenue.

abcZ

Graphite You're describing criminal business practices as a business model.

Graphite

abcZ

Many wish it were criminal. But alas, capitalism at its finest /s.

abcZ

That isn't capitalism. That's a broken and uncompetitive system caused by excessive legislation.

Graphite

abcZ

I disagree. That is the very nature of capitalism.
It's the LACK of regulation, which creates the uncompetitive system. Anti-trust and consumer protection legislation isn't strong enough so we have these conglomerates like Google that can "experiment" with novel business models that cross ethical boundaries. Meanwhile they lobby Congress to ensure that effective legislation does not pass.

abcZ

Graphite Totally wrong. A truly capitalist system leads to competition, which limits profits and keeps players small. Its only with legislation that the market becomes imbalanced and uncompetitive behemoths form.

Graphite

abcZ

Sounds like an idealized laissez-faire capitalist society that does not exist, and has never existed. It basically assumes nobody gets greedy even without any checks or balances.
Ayn Rynd had a similar philosophy in which a pure system could exist without government intervention. IMO, it's fantasy.
And with fantastical systems that never existed in practice, its easy to say that legislation is the cause of the problems.

The real world history tells a different story of unregulated capitalism. JP Morgan, Rockefeller, etc. Newspapers and railroads. Unregulated markets have never truly fostered competition, rather the opposite occurs. Mergers, acquisitions, and consolidation leads to the few ruling the many.

Blastoidea

Google is not Apple, and does not have the closed system mindset baked into their corporate policies and outlook.

ve3jlg

Graphite The real world history tells a different story of unregulated capitalism

And closer to the focus of this forum, look at Apple's ecosystem and app store, music store and phone (iOS) lockdowns. They have made billions because of their greedy behaviour.

Suggested reading for anyone in this thread: Chokepoint Capitalism

In Chokepoint Capitalism, scholar Rebecca Giblin and writer and activist Cory Doctorow argue we're in a new era of “chokepoint capitalism,” with exploitative businesses creating insurmountable barriers to competition that enable them to capture value that should rightfully go to others.

Chokepoint Capitalism

This book was the first purchased content I loaded onto my new phone with GrapheneOS.

On my blacker days though, I do imagine that Google is watching GrapheneOS and making it more difficult for alternate OSs, by their code and framework changes.

GrapheneOS devs have stated that they expect Google will fix their camera software permissions (SELINUX) problem to allow the camera software to work properly on Pixels. Personally, I don't see expect they will if it makes their cameras properly usable on P7s (but would be thrilled to be wrong about this). Having their high-performing cameras work on OS's that make it easier to block Google and no watch their ads is clearly not in Google's business interests.

abcZ

Graphite Actually, greed is what makes capitalism work. What hasn't ever been tested actually is a completely unregulated economy. EVERY economy has been regulated in some manner.

ve3jlg

@ no one would buy them if they couldn't unlock them.

Many people like Google Pixels and the Google ecosystem though.

Graphite

ve3jlg
Chokepoint Capitalism seems like a good analysis of this topic. Thank you.

breathless19

Thanks for the vigorous discussion guys. I read all of your answers out loud to my friend and we discussed further.

ve3jlg GrapheneOS devs have stated that they expect Google will fix their camera software permissions (SELINUX) problem to allow the camera software to work properly on Pixels

Can someone provide a quick explanation what this means and what the real world effect is in using the camera in GrapheneOS?

Graphite

abcZ

abcZ What hasn't ever been tested actually is a completely unregulated economy. EVERY economy has been regulated in some manner.

Agreed. I hear the same from the opposite end. Many communists also say that no "pure" implementation has ever been done, but if it had, it would be utopia.

abcZ greed is what makes capitalism work

I try to avoid extremes. Absolute self-interest (greed) of Ayn Rand's philosophy takes this concept to its extreme.
A well balanced system will have greed, and regulation.

abcZ

Graphite The distinction, however, is that a pure implementation of communism is a technical impossibility, since a fundamental characteristic of human nature is greed, which means that communism can only be achieved through force, which turns it into a soviet style dictatorship rather than a pure implementation of communism.

Capitalism, on the other hand, is consistent with human nature, which means that elimination of all regulation would naturally lead to it, but also anarchy, which would be quite dangerous and loaded with unpleasantness. So don't think that I'm advocating for actually trying this!

Blastoidea

Someone famous said “That which unregulated is out of control.”

abcZ

Blastoidea Someone famous said “That which unregulated is out of control.”

If you remove humanity, is nature out of control? Seems to me that nature tends towards a competitive balance. Its only when humans impose regulation on nature that things go seriously wrong.

Graphite

abcZ

It's an interesting conversation, although down the rabbit hole :)

abcZ a fundamental characteristic of human nature is greed

Greed, force, violence are all "consistent with human nature".
Pure forms are always hypothetical and cannot really ever be achieved in the idealized versions described by Marx or Rynd. As you say, Communism will devolve into dictatorship. But LF Capitalism would devolve into anarchy. But that's not set in stone either. More often they evolve into a mix. China is a mix of communism with some capitalism thrown in, and the US is capitalist with plenty of socialism.

abcZ Seems to me that nature tends towards a competitive balance.

Social Darwinism is kinda defunct as a philosophy now. Natural doesn't mean good though. Not good for a society anyway. It'll be natural for the strongest males to kill all competition and take the women. And some early civilizations did this. They were natural, but not sustainable and certainly not considered good.

abcZ Its only when humans impose regulation on nature that things go seriously wrong

It would be a dream for some who despise all regulation, to strip all natural resources from this planet till there's nothing left but a toxic wasteland. As long as they can rule over the rubble.