Modal CollectiveNew blog post: Why "digital sovereignty" requires a free software alternative to Android and iOS, and how we're building towards that 🏗️
s-ol@modal there's something odd going on with the link preview here, when I click on the bubble in Phanpy it takes me to the https://modal.cx homepage, not the blog post, even though the title of the link preview corresponds to the blog post.
Ah yep, the opengraph url field seems to be fixed to https://modal.cx when it should be set to the permalink of the specific page:
<meta property="og:url" content="https://modal.cx/">
adingbatponder 
👾@modal Bravo! A resilient society is the most important duty of government and instead it shifts the state and economy to total reliance on internet connectivity and remote access to servers on the other side of the planet. Vital to use tech to be more efficient, but no good if it falls over and leaves us in the stone age overnight.
Tak!@modal ok, but what are you doing about the political and social problems you outline in your post?
there are already a bunch of non-ios/-android mobile operating systems, including at least one built on gnome/gtk, but the actual problem is that many people can't practically use them because they need the proprietary apps for government id, banking, mobile payments, etc. - yet another mobile platform that doesn't solve these problems won't change anything
Мейкпост
Val Packett 🧉@Tak there's no "yet another", the work happens directly in existing upstream projects as much as possible.
People have been trying to Just Do Something about these problems ever since the free software movement became a thing. I am now convinced that a BIG reason advocacy and policy work has been slow/stalled/difficult is that we (FOSS devs) have not yet been offering a compelling platform.
With everything that's happened recently, the motivation to seek alternatives is higher than it's ever been, ethics and politics are now a consideration for more people than ever, but they'll never be the ONLY consideration, so we must respond with goal-oriented, vision-driven development to make sure we can actually compete.
Once we reach the state where the platform is:
- all community-driven FOSS from the kernel up, guaranteeing truly "forever" updates like on PCs, AND
- doesn't fall apart on its own / meets a standard of quality at least on select "blessed" devices, AND
- has enough ability to do things, even if some have to be done awkwardly via compat layers at first, AND
- offers something new and exciting, from a non-nerdy perspective
Then it will become a lot easier to go around telling everyone "hey, I want to be able to do your $thing on this cool device, it's important for sovereignty and freedom reasons and also just look at what amazing new capabilities this thing has, and I have 50 friends who want to switch to it but your $thing's absence is making that difficult, I'll be happy to help with bringing your thing to this".
The @modal vision is really exciting to me because it's basically about pushing existing projects like pmOS across that line, plus adding actually-good peer-to-peer communication as the "new and exciting" factor.
@valpackett @modal maemo has been around since 2005
ubuntu touch since 2013
sailfish os since 2011
the problem has never been lack of a technical alternative
Anders Cornelius MadsenYes, the problem is very much a lack of technical alternatives. As long as a technical alternative cannot be used for online banking, storing your tickets and whatever else that requires an unbroken Google Android to work, the technical alternative is irrelevant, regardless of how nice or how open or how technically supreme it may be.
Is the problem with the app developers that relies on Googles services for their app to be secure? - hell yes. But the problem is still that as long as the technical alternative offers nothing truly compelling to the end-user, the end-user will not care enough to make a stink about it (outside of our small group here on Mastodon, that is).
The good thing is that most of the services that requires impeccable security are also heavily regulated, and as such possible to change through political pressure. However, applying political pressure successfully will require the technical alternatives to be at least equal to Android and iOS - otherwise the attempt will be dead on arrival.
I agree that requiring a common hardware platform is probably the first step. If the current alternatives can be installed on a broader selection of hardware, improvements are much more likely to come faster.
f_underscore@modal IMHO the path forward is open source hardware, in the model of the upcoming MNT reform touch.
Instead of fighting the uphill battle of liberating existing hardware, the community would create custom hardware,hand picking the hardware components that have the most compatibility.
And then concentrate all dev effort on that device, to get it fully operational even for regular people.
I guess we need more pcb designers to join the cause.
Instead of fighting the uphill battle of liberating existing hardware, the community would create custom hardware,hand picking the hardware components that have the most compatibility.
And then concentrate all dev effort on that device, to get it fully operational even for regular people.
I guess we need more pcb designers to join the cause.
Open source hardware is in my opinion a pipe dream in a world that moves as fast as the mobile devices do at the moment.
I really can't see anyone spend millions on developing hardware and the give it away for free, and I definitely can't see a group of open source developers with limited funding keep up with the current development speed of new mobile hardware.
I think that requiring a common, open platform is probably the best way forward at the moment. That will allow companies to develop new hardware and make money on their investment, while allowing end-users to install the operating system of their choice, just like on a PC.
@madsenandersc @modal Fair enough, I personally see it as a pipe dream that the powers that be will do anything for the common good, the same people who are now proposing chat control and mandatory ID verifications to "protect the children".
1/2
1/2
@madsenandersc @modal
Open source hardware already exists, with examples like the Purism #Librem5 and the #MNT computers. I'm sure MNT profits and I love their business model. They have designed a flexible PCB that uses an adapter board and as such you can easily swap the processor for another one.
These devices might not have the latest and greatest in hardware, but they work. I have a lot of faith in the upcoing MNT Reform Touch as a platform for Mobile Linux.
2/2
Open source hardware already exists, with examples like the Purism #Librem5 and the #MNT computers. I'm sure MNT profits and I love their business model. They have designed a flexible PCB that uses an adapter board and as such you can easily swap the processor for another one.
These devices might not have the latest and greatest in hardware, but they work. I have a lot of faith in the upcoing MNT Reform Touch as a platform for Mobile Linux.
2/2
@f_underscore @modal
No offense, but Purism Librem 5 stands absolutely no chance with an ordinary consumer.
799 USD for a phone with specs like the Motorola e14 (and that is even being generous) simply has no place in the market. Without a compelling reason, consumers will not even give it a second look.
@madsenandersc @modal Yeah, I fully agree, I was mostly citing the Librem5 exists. I have hopes for the MNT reform touch, but that too will be limited spec wise. But it is something and is based on more recent hardware like the RK3588.
It's got mostly the same components as the #MNT Pocket Reform, which is a real product.
It's got mostly the same components as the #MNT Pocket Reform, which is a real product.
Jan Vlug@f_underscore @madsenandersc @modal
For average consumers the #Librem5 will be inconvenient compared to modern Android or Apple phones.
But there are also people (like me) who have some tolerance for inconvenience to gain freedom and independence from #bigtech.
I'm using my Librem 5 as my daily phone. The operating system will soon get an upgrade.
By buying a Librem 5 one could support the development of #Linux phones.
That is really fine, and all the more power to you (and no sarcasm intended at all - I really mean it).
However, it does not change the fact that we cannot let "digital sovereignty" wait for open source hardware (that is where the discussion started), and that is why I called it a pipe dream. It is simply to far into the future at this point.
And yes, I was not clear enough in my language. It is not that open source hardware cannot happen, it is that it cannot be the path forward to digital sovereignty.
ChasalinThere's lots of Open Source hardware already.
And Open Source doesn't mean 'free of charge'
Far from complete list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_hardware_projects
@chasalin @f_underscore @modal
The problem is not if it is available - the problem is, if it has any place whatsoever in the market, outside of a few enthusiasts.
There are people buying a Morgan car today, but they are so few and far between, that the car in itself has no impact on the market or the world at all.
Having a mobile phone with open source hardware is irrelevant if it is so expensive that only a few people can - or will - buy it.
@madsenandersc @chasalin @modal oh, right, thanks for the clarification, and yeah, I agree with your points.
🏳️🌈🎃🇧🇷Luana🇧🇷🎃🏳️🌈@modal ugh I wish so fucking bad this didn’t have gnome propaganda embedded into it
Anatole Gérard--Chevais
Alexandre Franke