#about android os

[computertips]

The Silent Struggle Behind Android OS: Freedom, and the Code That Binds Us

In the glittering world of mobile technology, about android OS -Android OS stands as a paradox—both a symbol of liberation and a battlefield of complexity. Behind its colorful interface and seemingly effortless usability lies a storm of fragmentation, security debates, development dilemmas, and user fatigue. This is not just an operating system—it is a philosophy, an ecosystem, and at times, a technological suffering masked by sleek design.

The Birth of an Open Dream

Android OS was born from idealism. Created by Android Inc. and acquired by Google in 2005, it aimed to provide a free, open-source operating system for mobile devices. On paper, it was freedom. In reality, freedom comes at a cost. The open nature of Android, though revolutionary, led to fragmentation—a term that developers dread and users don’t even realize they're victims of.

Unlike Apple’s iOS, which is tightly controlled, Android OS lives in chaos. Every manufacturer, from Samsung to Xiaomi, adds its own layer of customization. What should be a unified experience becomes a maze of interfaces, settings, and updates. The suffering begins not with bugs, but with inconsistency.

Fragmentation: The Curse of Freedom

One of the most persistent issues with Android OS is version fragmentation. While Google may release Android 14 with cutting-edge features, most users are stuck on Android 11 or 12. Device manufacturers delay updates, carriers restrict rollouts, and budget phones are left behind.

This fragmentation results in:

Security vulnerabilities

Developer nightmares

Inconsistent user experiences

Imagine a developer trying to build an app that works flawlessly on every Android version, screen size, and device manufacturer’s skin. It’s not development—it’s a warzone. The same code behaves differently on a Samsung Galaxy than it does on a OnePlus or a Pixel. The Android SDK is rich, but its implementation suffers from ambiguity.

The Custom ROM Renaissance: Hope or Despair?

For many power users, the answer to Android OS's inconsistency lies in custom ROMs. These community-built versions of Android, like LineageOS, Pixel Experience, and crDroid, promise a cleaner, bloat-free, and frequently updated OS.

But flashing a ROM isn’t easy. It demands:

Unlocking bootloaders

Wiping data

Navigating XDA threads filled with jargon

And often, it ends in a bricked device or a half-functional phone. Custom ROMs represent the hacker’s hope, but they are also a reminder of the suffering required for perfection in an imperfect world.

Security: Open Doors and Broken Locks

Security on Android OS is a double-edged sword. On one hand, Google Play Protect and monthly security patches offer decent protection. On the other, the Play Store is still occasionally flooded with malware-laced apps, spyware, and data mining tools disguised as innocent utilities.

And for users who venture outside the Play Store to sideload apps, the risks amplify. Malware like Joker and Triada exploit the very openness that defines Android.

This is the cruel irony of the Android OS: the freedom to install anything becomes the freedom to compromise everything. Security becomes a matter of personal responsibility, which most average users are ill-equipped to handle.

Developer’s Despair: Code Once, Debug Forever

Developing for Android isn’t just a career—it’s a trial by fire. The platform encourages innovation but demands constant adaptation. An app that works on Android 9 may crash on Android 13 due to deprecated APIs, new permissions models, or background process restrictions.

Tools like Android Studio, Jetpack Compose, and Kotlin try to make development smoother. But the underlying OS complexity turns every build into a gamble.

Developers often suffer from:

Endless compatibility testing

UI bugs due to device-specific issues

Battery optimization conflicts

Strict Play Store policies

Each update feels like treading on landmines. The suffering isn’t in writing code—it’s in making it work across the chaotic universe Android OS inhabits.

The OEM War: Bloatware, Ads, and Manipulation

Most Android users never experience “pure Android.” Instead, they get heavily modified skins like MIUI, One UI, ColorOS, or FuntouchOS—each trying to differentiate but often adding bloatware, unnecessary features, or even ads in system apps.

This user exploitation represents a deep philosophical corruption. Android was meant to liberate. Instead, OEMs have commercialized the user experience, embedding trackers, replacing default apps with affiliate versions, and prioritizing revenue over usability.

The user suffers unknowingly, tapping on what seems like a game only to be bombarded by ads, privacy invasions, and battery drain.

Digital Balance or Digital Burnout?

With the Android OS powering billions of devices, it shapes how people live, work, and think. The Digital Wellbeing initiative by Google was supposed to address this. But the irony remains: the same OS that tries to reduce screen time is designed to keep users engaged with infinite scrolling, constant notifications, and addictive app loops.

Behind the OS's logic is a battlefield of attention economy algorithms. The freedom of Android becomes a prison of choice—thousands of apps, endless customization, infinite distractions. For the mindful user, this is mental suffering cloaked in pixels.

Conclusion: The Beautiful Struggle of Android OS

Android OS is not just an operating system—it’s a canvas for creativity, a playground for hackers, and a minefield for developers and users alike. Its open-source roots inspire innovation but breed chaos. It offers freedom, but at the cost of control and consistency.

In a world obsessed with clean design and minimalism, Android OS remains a messy masterpiece—glorious in its imperfection, suffering from its success, and yet, still evolving.

As users, developers, and dreamers, we continue to engage with it—not because it's perfect, but because it's alive, raw, and real.

Meta Description (SEO): Explore the chaotic beauty of Android OS. From fragmentation to freedom, uncover the hidden struggles behind the world's most popular mobile operating system.

[harryinramshackle]

1. You used to look forward to your future so much(or maybe you still do) and 2. you’re good at telling stories to other people and they’re usually entertained by them.

(I don’t know who the second character is so I just made assumptions based on Azul & Hilda + the mouthwashing guy)

(HERE!)

SJAOZJAKS THE FIRST ONE HELP....I mean I kinda still do but yeah, definitely not the same anymore <3

And the stories thing is so funny because YES. I tend to just tell my friends wacky stuff that happen in my life and they're all just end up looking at me dumbfounded. Even funnier, I have a but of a speech problem, so I stumble with my words a lot, making a simple story much more complicated than it needed to be lol

[foxpunk]

"no brand is actually good--" true. "--or better." now hold on a minute.

[medickpidia]

Information

The Amazon Fire Max 11 is the most powerful and feature-rich Fire tablet to date, designed for streaming, reading, gaming, and productivity. With a vivid 11-inch display, a 14-hour battery life, and support for an optional stylus and keyboard, this tablet is an excellent all-in-one device for work and entertainment. Its sleek aluminum design and lightweight build make it stylish and portable, while the octa-core processor ensures smooth performance. >>>>----Click To Know More About That Product----<<<<

Features

✅ Vivid 11” Display for Immersive Viewing

11-inch Full HD (2000 x 1200) display with anti-glare coating.

TÜV Rheinland-certified for reduced blue light exposure, minimizing eye strain.

Perfect for watching movies, gaming, and reading.

✅ Powerful Performance

Octa-core processor for fast multitasking.

4GB RAM for smooth app performance.

Runs on Fire OS, optimized for Amazon services and Android apps via the Amazon Appstore.

✅ All-Day Battery Life

Up to 14 hours of mixed-use battery life.

USB-C fast charging for quick power-ups.

✅ Optional Accessories for Enhanced Productivity

Stylus Pen (sold separately): Supports handwriting, drawing, and note-taking.

Detachable Keyboard (sold separately): Converts the tablet into a mini laptop for work and school.

✅ Ample Storage

128GB internal storage (expandable via microSD card up to 1TB).

Download movies, games, books, and apps for offline use.

✅ Great for Streaming & Gaming

Compatible with popular apps like Netflix, Prime Video, Disney+, Hulu, and YouTube.

Supports cloud gaming services like Amazon Luna for console-quality gaming on the go.

✅ Advanced Camera & Connectivity

8MP front and rear cameras with 1080p HD video recording.

Dual microphones for clear video calls.

Wi-Fi 6 support for faster, more reliable internet connectivity.

✅ Durable & Stylish Design

Premium aluminum body for a sleek and lightweight feel.

Scratch-resistant screen for durability.

✅ Kid & Family Friendly

Parental controls and Amazon Kids+ subscription options.

Multiple user profiles for shared family use.

Ideal 

✔️ Entertainment lovers who enjoy streaming, gaming, and reading. ✔️ Students & professionals who need a lightweight, productivity-friendly tablet. ✔️ Families looking for a durable and secure device for all ages. ✔️ Amazon ecosystem users who want seamless access to Kindle, Alexa, and Prime services.

Specifications

Display: 11” Full HD (2000 x 1200) touchscreen

Processor: Octa-core

RAM: 4GB

Storage: 128GB (expandable via microSD up to 1TB)

Battery Life: Up to 14 hours

Charging: USB-C, fast charging

Cameras: 8MP front and rear, 1080p HD video

Connectivity: Wi-Fi 6, Bluetooth

Audio: Dual speakers with Dolby Atmos support

Operating System: Fire OS

The Amazon Fire Max 11 is a versatile, high-performance tablet perfect for work, entertainment, and creativity. With a stunning display, powerful hardware, and long battery life, it’s a great alternative to more expensive tablets for both casual and professional users.

[piratesexmachine420]

Thoughts on Linux (the OS)

Misconception!

I don't want to be obnoxiously pedantic, but Linux is not an OS. It is a kernel, which is just part of an OS. (Like how Windows contains a lot more than just KERNEL32.DLL). A very, very important piece, which directly shapes the ways that all the other programs will talk to each other. Think of it like a LEGO baseplate.

Everything else is built on top of the kernel. But, a baseplate does not a city make. We need buildings! A full operating system is a combination of a kernel and kernel-level (get to talk to hardware directly) utilities for talking to hardware (drivers), and userspace (get to talk to hardware ONLY through the kernel) utilities ranging in abstraction level from stuff like window management and sound servers and system bootstrapping to app launchers and file explorers and office suites. Every "Linux OS" is a combination of that LEGO baseplate with some permutation of low and high-level userspace utilities.

Now, a lot of Linux-based OSes do end up feeling (and being) very similar to each other. Sometimes because they're directly copying each other's homework (AKA forking, it's okay in the open source world as long as you follow the terms of the licenses!) but more generally it's because there just aren't very many options for a lot of those utilities.

Want your OS to be more than just a text prompt? Your pick is between X.org (old and busted but...well, not reliable, but a very well-known devil) and Wayland (new hotness, trying its damn hardest to subsume X and not completely succeeding). Want a graphics toolkit? GTK or Qt. Want to be able to start the OS? systemd or runit. (Or maybe SysVinit if you're a real caveman true believer.) Want sound? ALSA is a given, but on top of that your options are PulseAudio, PipeWire, and JACK. Want an office suite? Libreoffice is really the only name in the game at present. Want terminal utilities? Well, they're all gonna have to conform to the POSIX spec in some capacity. GNU coreutils, busybox, toybox, all more or less the same programs from a user perspective.

Only a few ever get away from the homogeneity, like Android. But I know that you're not asking about Android. When people say "Linux OS" they're talking about the homogeneity. The OSes that use terminals. The ones that range in looks from MacOS knockoff to Windows knockoff to 'impractical spaceship console'. What do I think about them?

I like them! I have my strongly-felt political and personal opinions about which building blocks are better than others (generally I fall into the 'functionality over ideology' camp; Nvidia proprietary over Nouveau, X11 over Wayland, Systemd over runit, etc.) but I like the experience most Linux OSes will give me.

I like my system to be a little bit of a hobby, so when I finally ditched Windows for the last time I picked Arch Linux. Wouldn't recommend it to anyone who doesn't want to treat their OS as a hobby, though. There are better and easier options for 'normal users'.

I like the terminal very much. I understand it's intimidating for new users, but it really is an incredible tool for doing stuff once you're in the mindset. GUIs are great when you're inexperienced, but sometimes you just wanna tell the computer what you want with your words, right? So many Linux programs will let you talk to them in the terminal, or are terminal-only. It's very flexible.

I also really, really love the near-universal concept of a 'package manager' -- a program which automatically installs other programs for you. Coming from Windows it can feel kinda restrictive that you have to go through this singular port of entry to install anything, instead of just looking up the program and running an .msi file, but I promise that if you get used to it it's very hard to go back. Want to install discord? yay -S discord. Want to install firefox? yay -S firefox. Minecraft? yay -S minecraft-launcher. etc. etc. No more fucking around in the Add/Remove Programs menu, it's all in one place! Only very rarely will you want to install something that isn't in the package manager's repositories, and when you do you're probably already doing something that requires technical know-how.

Not a big fan of the filesystem structure. It's got a lot of history. 1970s mainframe computer operation procedure history. Not relevant to desktop users, or even modern mainframe users. The folks over at freedesktop.org have tried their best to get at least the user's home directory cleaned up but...well, there's a lot of historical inertia at play. It's not a popular movement right now but I've been very interested in watching some people try to crack that nut.

Aaaaaand I think those are all the opinions I can share without losing everyone in the weeds. Hope it was worth reading!

[emacs-unofficial]

The Pebble Smartwatch is (maybe) coming back!!!

And the OS has been Open Sourced!!

For those that don't know the Pebble, it was one of the first smartwatches.

Some things about it where there has been NO SUITABLE REPLACEMENT FOR IN ALMOST 10 YEARS (that have more than 3 of these):

- an e-paper display

- a Battery that lasts more than 3 days.

- simple (I don't need 1000 features I don't use but make the watch expensive and cost battery life. I only need telling time, notifications, music control, alarms, weather, calendar, sleep/step tracking. Thats it)

- hackable (you can't even create watchfaces on the apple watch, and for the google pixel watch you need the whole Android SDK and basically have to make an android app) the pebble had thousends of user created watchfaces on its store.

- freaking physical buttons. I loved to control my music from my wrist without having to look.

I've got myself a google pixel watch a few months ago and I hate not beeing able to control music blindly and having to charge it every 1-3 days. The only good thing is, that I can use Google Pay from it and control some HomeAssistant stuff.

[shepscapades]

SORRY IF THIS HAS BEEN ANSWERED BEFORE! BUT! do the androids ever need to charge? or do they purely run on thirium? like are they solar powered? do they have wireless charging pads they sleep under? like how does this work /gq

NO THATS A VALID QUESTION!! Honestly the actual dbh wiki is an unprecedented amount of unhelpful so I have to make everything up myself /silly

Afaik, thirium is only ever described as the fluid required to power the androids’ “biocomponents,” aka organs, aka individual modules that each power, like... A function. For example, there’s an audio biocomponent, the eyes are biocomponents, the thirium pump and thirium pump regulator are both biocomponents, etc etc etc. So technically, as long as an android has thirium, their biocomponents should be able to work just fine? But it seems improbable to me that an android could just work and work and work and never get “tired” (less effective, worn down over time, fried, etc). So in dbhc, the way the androids were first designed by Xisuma meant that they could only work for so long before they needed to go into a Low Power Mode of some sort, aka to rest (so their circuits and insides don’t fry from overuse).

Later, sometime late s8 or early s9, xisuma and doc tweak the androids’ OS so that Low Power Mode works more or less like sleeping (as an option to androids who want more of a human experience). Instead of the androids needing to sit/stand somewhere and be sort of inoperable/limited capability for a few hours, an android will start getting “sleepy” or low-inefficiency/sluggish/etc after a certain amount of time and then require proper rest (I’m sure that x and doc time it so that androids are running on a clock similar to human bodies—aka, active for about 12-16 hours a day, needing rest for 6-8 hours, etc). While they can’t necessarily control the when the “sleepiness” comes on (such as when they’ve been working harder/running hotter one day and need rest sooner), I think I imagine that the androids do decide when to trigger or start sleep procedure/sleep mode/low power mode or whatever.

So, they don’t need to “charge” per se, but they definitely need rest! Giving them a rest period also makes Impulse’s specialty more meaningful, since he was designed to be able to work for longer periods of time without rest/carry heavier loads :]

[i-just-give-you-the-vidya-songs]

The song is the track that plays from the radio in the game 'Portal', a 2007 puzzle platform game developed and published by Valve. Initially released on Windows / Xbox 360 / Playstation 3, later released on Mac OS X (2010) / Linux (2013) / Android (2014) / Nintendo Switch (2022).

-Submission by anonymous

[the-sleepy-archivist]

Blocking Ads on Mobile Devices

Blocking ads on our phones is way harder than it should be so I figured I'd make some recommendations. These are not the only options out there, just the ones that I know and have used.

Please note that browser-level and system-level adblocking are complementary; you'll have the best experience if you use both of them together as they each block different things in different places. If you want a basic idea of how effective your combined adblocking setup is, you can visit this website in your mobile browser.

Lastly, there is some additional advice/info under the readmore if you're curious (EDIT: updated March 2025 to add more adblocking options for iOS and to add info about sideloading altered versions of social media apps that don't contain ads on Android and iOS).

Android

Browser-Level

uBlock Origin (for Firefox)

System-Level (works in all apps, not just browsers)

AdGuard

Blokada 5 (completely free version) OR Blokada 6 (has some newer features but they require a subscription)

iPhone/iPad

Browser-Level

AdGuard (Safari extension; free for basic browser-level blocking, requires a subscription or one time purchase of “lifetime” license for custom filters)

1Blocker (Safari extension from an indie developer; can enable one built-in or custom filter list for free, requires a subscription or one time purchase of “lifetime” license for enabling multiple filter lists and updating filter lists to the latest version automatically)

Wipr 2 (one time purchase from indie developer; simplest option to use, but also the least configurable. Best if you are looking for one time set and forget and don’t need any custom filters. Note that it does not have a system-level blocking option)

System-Level (works in all apps, not just browsers)

AdGuard (requires subscription or one time purchase of “lifetime” license for system-level blocking)

1Blocker (can activate without a subscription, but requires subscription or one time purchase of “lifetime” license to enable system-level blocking AND browser-level blocking simultaneously)

AdGuard DNS only (this is free and does not require the AdGuard app, BUT I would only recommend it for advanced users, as you can't easily turn it off like you can with the app. Credit to this Reddit thread for the DNS profile)

Some additional info: browser-level blocking is a browser addon or extension, like you might be used to from a desktop computer. This inspects the HTML code returned by websites and searches for patterns that identify the presence of an ad or other annoyance (popup videos, cookie agreements, etc.). System-level blocking is almost always DNS-based. Basically whenever an app asks your phone's OS to make a connection to a website that is known for serving ads, the system-level blocker replies "sorry, I don't know her 🤷‍♂️💅" and the ad doesn't get downloaded. This works in most places, not just a browser, but be warned that it might make your battery drain a little faster depending on the app/setup.

Each of those types of blocking has strengths and weaknesses. System-level DNS blocking blocks ads in all apps, but companies that own advertising networks AND the websites those ads are served on can combine their services into the same domain to render DNS blocking useless; you can’t block ads served by Facebook/Meta domains without also blocking all of Facebook and Instagram as well because they made sure their ads are served from the same domain as all the user posts you actually want to see. Similarly, browser-level blocking can recognize ads by appearance and content, regardless of what domain they’re served from, so it can block them on Instagram and Facebook. However, it needs to be able to inspect the content being loaded in order to look for ads, and there’s no way to do that in non-browser apps. That’s why using both together will get you the best results.

These limitations do mean that you can’t block ads in the Facebook or Instagram apps, unfortunately, only in the website versions of them visited in your browser. It also means ads served by meta’s/facebook’s ad network in other apps can’t be blocked either (unless you're one of the rare beasts who doesn't use facebook or instagram or threads, in which case feel free to blacklist all Meta/FB domains and watch your ads disappear 😍; I'm jealous and in awe of you lol).

One note: some apps may behave unpredictably when they can't download ads. For example, the Tumblr app has big black spaces where the ads are, and sometimes those spaces collapse as you scroll past them and it messes up scrolling for a few seconds (UPDATE: looks like the scrolling issue may have actually been a Tumblr bug that they have now fixed, at least on iOS). Still way less annoying than getting ads for Draco Malfoy seduction roleplay AI chatbots imo though. And honestly *most* apps handle this fairly gracefully, like a mobile game I play just throws error messages like "ad is not ready" and then continues like normal.

One final note: on Android, you may actually be able to find hacked versions of Meta’s apps that have the ad frameworks removed. In some cases they are a little janky (unsurprisingly, apps don’t always take kindly to having some of their innards ripped out by a third-party), and they are often out of date. BUT in return you get an Instagram app with no ads whatsoever, and some of them even add additional features like buttons for saving IG videos and photos to your phone. However, use these apps at your own risk, as there is functionally no way to validate the code that the third-parties have added or removed from the app. Example altered IG app (I have not vetted this altered app, it's just a popular option): link.

It is technically possible to install altered apps on iOS as well, but Apple makes it much, much harder to do (unless you are jailbroken, which is a whole different ballgame). I'm not going to cover sideloading or jailbreaking here because even I as a very techy person eventually grew tired of messing with it or having to pay for it. If you're interested you can read more about the different ways to do sideloading on iOS here.

[myconetted]

So, about Linux. Do you have a phone that uses Linux? Is there one out there that can access tumblr and be reasonably usable? I'm just sick of Apple and Google's BS and want an opinion from someone in the know.

technically: android is built on linux

less pedantically: i personally have a google pixel with stock android because it's the least bloated and i don't trust most other manufacturers to not put dumb bullshit on my phone.

if you want a linux phone then i've heard good things about the pinephone. here are the operating systems it supports: https://pine64.org/documentation/PinePhone/Software/Releases/. note that a lot of the OSes don't have full support for all of the device features like bluetooth, and there won't be android app support out of the box. you'll have to use something like waydroid and idk how good the compatibility is.

if you want something closer to the normal android experience, grapheneOS might be up your alley. caveat: there is very limited device support; they basically only have official support for google pixel devices: https://grapheneos.org/faq#device-support. google play is disabled by default but you can enable the sandboxed version of it to install tumblr.

if you see other custom ROMs or AOSP-based OSes, you should do some research to make sure you're comfortable with the developers and the security for them. grapheneOS is generally well regarded and most other projects don't have anywhere near the level of focus on security. (less pussyfooted answer: i wouldn't use them.)

[tetranymous]

Crashed again last night and here's confirmation that it's a RAM issue

It's trying to address nearly 5 GIGS of RAM when I only have about 3.

Does anyone know of a way to force a memory limit on Firefox for Android?

All of the methods I've seen are only for desktop (mobile doesn't have about:config) or people saying that you should leave the memory management to the OS (clearly not helpful) or people complaining about slowness or storage space or browser crashes (irrelevant, clogging up search results) or confusing ram with internal storage (who even decided to call internal storage memory in the first place??? As if RAM didn't already mean random access MEMORY).

I'm getting sick of Firefox suddenly using up all of the RAM and causing my entire phone to hard crash and reboot 😭 (not just a tab or browser crash).

My phone's fairly old (I've gotta upgrade soon due to the 3g shutoff and lack of VOLTE support) but that's still a while away and it's only Firefox that's causing this to happen, everything else runs fine (plus I'd still like to use this thing even when I upgrade!). Can't mess about in root until I upgrade because this era of phone punishes you if you do (and I don't want to break something in there and be out of a phone for several months! Again!)

[mostlysignssomeportents]

The paradox of choice screens

I'm coming to BURNING MAN! On TUESDAY (Aug 27) at 1PM, I'm giving a talk called "DISENSHITTIFY OR DIE!" at PALENQUE NORTE (7&E). On WEDNESDAY (Aug 28) at NOON, I'm doing a "Talking Caterpillar" Q&A at LIMINAL LABS (830&C).

It's official: the DOJ has won its case, and Google is a convicted monopolist. Over the next six months, we're gonna move into the "remedy" phase, where we figure out what the court is going to order Google to do to address its illegal monopoly power:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/08/07/revealed-preferences/#extinguish-v-improve

That's just the beginning, of course. Even if the court orders some big, muscular remedies, we can expect Google to appeal (they've already said they would) and that could drag out the case for years. But that can be a feature, not a bug: a years-long appeal will see Google on its very best behavior, with massive, attendant culture changes inside the company. A Google that's fighting for its life in the appeals court isn't going to be the kind of company that promotes a guy whose strategy for increasing revenue is to make Google Search deliberately worse, so that you will have to do more searches (and see more ads) to get the info you're seeking:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/04/24/naming-names/#prabhakar-raghavan

It's hard to overstate how much good stuff can emerge from a company that's mired itself in antitrust hell with extended appeals. In 1982, IBM wriggled off the antitrust hook after a 12-year fight that completely transformed the company's approach to business. After more than a decade of being micromanaged by lawyers who wanted to be sure that the company didn't screw up its appeal and anger antitrust enforcers, IBM's executives were totally transformed. When the company made its first PC, it decided to use commodity components (meaning anyone could build a similar PC by buying the same parts), and to buy its OS from an outside vendor called Micros-Soft (meaning competing PCs could use the same OS), and it turned a blind eye to the company that cloned the PC ROM, enabling companies like Dell, Compaq and Gateway to enter the market with "PC clones" that cost less and did more than the official IBM PC:

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/08/ibm-pc-compatible-how-adversarial-interoperability-saved-pcs-monopolization

The big question, of course, is whether the court will order Google to break up, say, by selling off Android, its ad-tech stack, and Chrome. That's a question I'll address on another day. For today, I want to think about how to de-monopolize browsers, the key portal to the internet. The world has two extremely dominant browsers, Safari and Chrome, and each of them are owned by an operating system vendor that pre-installs their own browser on their devices and pre-selects them as the default.

Defaults matter. That's a huge part of Judge Mehta's finding in the Google case, where the court saw evidence from Google's own internal research suggesting that people rarely change defaults, meaning that whatever the gadget does out of the box it will likely do forever. This puts a lie to Google's longstanding defense of its monopoly power: "choice is just a click away." Sure, it's just a click away – a click, you're pretty sure no one is ever going to make.

This means that any remedy to Google's browser dominance is going to involve a lot of wrangling about defaults. That's not a new wrangle, either. For many years, regulators and tech companies have tinkered with "choice screens" that were nominally designed to encourage users to try out different browsers and brake the inertia of the big two browsers that came bundled with OSes.

These choice screens have a mixed record. Google's 2019 Android setup choice screen for the European Mobile Application Distribution Agreement somehow managed to result in the vast majority of users sticking with Chrome. Microsoft had a similar experience in 2010 with BrowserChoice.eu, its response to the EU's 2000s-era antitrust action:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrowserChoice.eu

Does this mean that choice screens don't work? Maybe. The idea of choice screens comes to us from the "choice architecture" world of "nudging," a technocratic pseudoscience that grew to prominence by offering the promise that regulators could make big changes without having to do any real regulating:

https://verfassungsblog.de/nudging-after-the-replication-crisis/

Nudge research is mired in the "replication crisis" (where foundational research findings turn out to be nonreplicable, due to bad research methodology, sloppy analysis, etc) and nudge researchers keep getting caught committing academic fraud:

https://www.ft.com/content/846cc7a5-12ee-4a44-830e-11ad00f224f9

When the first nudgers were caught committing fraud, more than a decade ago, they were assumed to be outliers in an otherwise honest and exciting field:

https://www.npr.org/2016/10/01/496093672/power-poses-co-author-i-do-not-believe-the-effects-are-real

Today, it's hard to find much to salvage from the field. To the extent the field is taken seriously today, it's often due to its critics repeating the claims of its boosters, a process Lee Vinsel calls "criti-hype":

https://sts-news.medium.com/youre-doing-it-wrong-notes-on-criticism-and-technology-hype-18b08b4307e5

For example, the term "dark patterns" lumps together really sneaky tactics with blunt acts of fraud. When you click an "opt out of cookies" button and get a screen that says "Success!" but which has a tiny little "confirm" button on it that you have to click to actually opt out, that's not a "dark pattern," it's just a scam:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/27/beware-of-the-leopard/#relentless

By ascribing widespread negative effects to subtle psychological manipulation ("dark patterns") rather than obvious and blatant fraud, we inadvertently elevate "nudging" to a real science, rather than a cult led by scammy fake scientists.

All this raises some empirical questions about choice screens: do they work (in the sense of getting people to break away from defaults), and if so, what's the best way to make them work?

This is an area with a pretty good literature, as it turns out, thanks in part due to some natural experiments, like when Russia forced Google to offer choice screens for Android in 2017, but didn't let Google design that screen. The Russian policy produced a significant switch away from Google's own apps to Russian versions, primarily made by Yandex:

https://cepr.org/publications/dp17779

In 2023, Mozilla Research published a detailed study in which 12,000 people from Germany, Spain and Poland set up simulated mobile and desktop devices with different kinds of choice screens, a project spurred on by the EU's Digital Markets Act, which is going to mandate choice screens starting this year:

https://research.mozilla.org/browser-competition/choicescreen/

I'm spending this week reviewing choice screen literature, and I've just read the Mozilla paper, which I found very interesting, albeit limited. The biggest limitation is that the researchers are getting users to simulate setting up a new device and then asking them how satisfied they are with the experience. That's certainly a question worth researching, but a far more important question is "How do users feel about the setup choices they made later, after living with them on the devices they use every day?" Unfortunately, that's a much more expensive and difficult question to answer, and beyond the scope of this paper.

With that limitation in mind, I'm going to break down the paper's findings here and draw some conclusions about what we should be looking for in any kind of choice screen remedy that comes out of the DOJ antitrust victory over Google.

The first thing note is that people report liking choice screens. When users get to choose their browsers, they expect to be happy with that choice; by contrast, users are skeptical that they'll like the default browser the vendor chose for them. Users don't consider choice screens to be burdensome, and adding a choice screen doesn't appreciably increase setup time.

There are some nuances to this. Users like choice screens during device setup but they don't like choice screens that pop up the first time they use a browser. That makes total sense: "choosing a browser" is colorably part of the "setting up your gadget" task. By contrast, the first time you open a browser on a new device, it's probably to get something else done (e.g. look up how to install a piece of software you used on your old device) and being interrupted with a choice screen at that moment is an unwelcome interruption. This is the psychology behind those obnoxious cookie-consent pop-ups that website bombard you with when you first visit them: you've clicked to that website because you need something it has, and being stuck with a privacy opt-out screen at that moment is predictably frustrating (which is why companies do it, and also why the DMA is going to punish companies that do).

The researchers experimented with different kinds of choice screens, varying the number of browsers on offer and the amount of information given on each. Again, users report that they prefer more choices and more information, and indeed, more choice and more info is correlated with choosing indie, non-default browsers, but this effect size is small (<10%), and no matter what kind of choice screen users get, most of them come away from the experience without absorbing any knowledge about indie browsers.

The order in which browsers are presented has a much larger effect than how many browsers or how much detail is present. People say they want lots of choices, but they usually choose one of the first four options. That said, users who get choice screens say it changes which browser they'd choose as a default.

Some of these contradictions appear to stem from users' fuzziness on what "default browser" means. For an OS vendor, "default browser" is the browser that pops up when you click a link in an email or social media. For most users, "default browser" means "the browser pinned to my home screen."

Where does all this leave us? I think it cashes out to this: choice screens will probably make a appreciable, but not massive, difference in browser dominance. They're cheap to implement, have no major downsides, and are easy to monitor. Choice screens might be needed to address Chrome's dominance even if the court orders Google to break off Chrome and stand it up as a separate business (we don't want any browser monopolies, even if they're not owned by a search monopolist!). So yeah, we should probably make a lot of noise to the effect that the court should order a choice screen, as part of a remedy.

That choice screen should be presented during device setup, with the choices presented in random order – with this caveat: Chrome should never appear in the top four choices.

All of that would help address the browser duopoly, even if it doesn't solve it. I would love to see more market-share for Firefox, which is the browser I've used every day for more than a decade, on my laptop and my phone. Of course, Mozilla has a role to play here. The company says it's going to refocus on browser quality, at the expense of the various side-hustles it's tried, which have ranged from uninteresting to catastrophically flawed:

https://www.fastcompany.com/91167564/mozilla-wants-you-to-love-firefox-again

For example, there was the tool to automatically remove your information from scummy data brokers, that they outsourced to a scummy data-broker:

https://www.theverge.com/2024/3/22/24109116/mozilla-ends-onerep-data-removal-partnership

And there's the "Privacy Preserving Attribution" tracking system that helps advertisers target you with surveillance advertising (in a way that's less invasive than existing techniques). Mozilla rolled this into Firefox on an opt out basis, and made opting out absurdly complicated, suggesting that it knew that it was imposing something on its users that they wouldn't freely choose:

https://blog.privacyguides.org/2024/07/14/mozilla-disappoints-us-yet-again-2/

They've been committing these kinds of unforced errors for more than a decade, seeking some kind of balance between monopolistic web companies and its users' desire to have a browser that protects them from invasive and unfair practices:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/may/14/firefox-closed-source-drm-video-browser-cory-doctorow

These compromises represent the fallacy that Mozilla's future depends on keeping bullying entertainment companies and Big Tech happy, so it can go on serving its users. At the same time, these compromises have alienated Mozilla's core users, the technical people who were its fiercest evangelists. Those core users are the authority on technical questions for the normies in their life, and they know exactly how cursed it is for Moz to be making these awful compromises.

Moz has hemorrhaged users over the past decade, meaning they have even less leverage over the corporations demanding that they make more compromises. This sets up a doom loop: make a bad compromise, lose users, become more vulnerable to demands for even worse compromises. "This capitulation puts us in a great position to make a stand in some hypothetical future where we don't instantly capitulate again" is a pretty unconvincing proposition.

After the past decade's heartbreaks, seeing Moz under new leadership makes me cautiously hopeful. Like I say, I am dependent on Firefox and want an independent, principled browser vendor that sees their role as producing a "user agent" that is faithful to its users' interests above all else:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/05/07/treacherous-computing/#rewilding-the-internet

Of course, Moz depends on Google's payment for default search placement for 90% of its revenue. If Google can't pay for this in the future, the org is going to have to find another source of revenue. Perhaps that will be the EU, or foundations, or users. In any of these cases, the org will find it much easier to raise funds if it is standing up for its users – not compromising on their interests.

Community voting for SXSW is live! If you wanna hear RIDA QADRI and me talk about how GIG WORKERS can DISENSHITTIFY their jobs with INTEROPERABILITY, VOTE FOR THIS ONE!

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2024/08/12/defaults-matter/#make-up-your-mind-already

Image: ICMA Photos (modified) https://www.flickr.com/photos/icma/3635981474/

CC BY-SA 2.0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/

[wolfliving]

What has Google killed lately

IoT products.

Last year, the teams responsible for Pixel hardware and Android software were merged into one division, and Google today announced a “voluntary exit program” for employees working in the Platforms & Devices group.

SVP Rick Osterloh sent out a memo to employees this morning about the “voluntary exit program,” and the company confirmed to 9to5Google that this is happening.

This program applies to US employees working on Platforms & Devices, which includes Android (Auto, TV, Wear OS, XR), Chrome, ChromeOS, Google Photos, Google One, Pixel, Fitbit, and Nest. Google has many people around the world working on these products, but today’s announcement is just for those stateside.

Meanwhile, this is not a company-wide offer that applies to Search, AI, or other groups, though Alphabet’s new CFO last October said “driving further efficiencies” was a key priority.

Separately, software and hardware were already two very large organizations, with some overlap. Now that things have settled in recent months, employees have a better idea of their roles. Osterloh said the division received questions about the possibility of voluntary exits since the Pixel-Android merger. Not offering people the option to leave in advance was a complaint about how Google handled past layoffs.

The memo frames this exit program as being beneficial for those who might not be aligned or passionate about the combined organization’s mission or are having difficulty with their roles, and hybrid working requirements. 

In leaving Google, employees will get a severance package, with more details internally coming soon. From what we learned, this change does not coincide with any product roadmap changes. 

Before the merger, the Google hardware division last January switched to a functional organization model where there is one team (and leader) for teams like hardware engineering across Pixel, Nest, and Fitbit. At the same time, a few hundred roles were cut. The broader unification in April was designed to “speed up decision-making” internally. 

In offering this program today, Google wants employees “to be deeply committed to our mission and focused on building great products, with speed and efficiency.” The statement also makes reference to “tremendous momentum” and “so much important work ahead.” Google’s full statement is below.

The Platforms & Devices team is offering a voluntary exit program that provides US-based Googlers working on this team the ability to voluntarily leave the company with a severance package. This comes after we brought two large organizations together last year. There’s tremendous momentum on this team and with so much important work ahead, we want everyone to be deeply committed to our mission and focused on building great products, with speed and efficiency.

[ms-demeanor]

got a question I was hoping you could answer!

why do all apps have to go through an app store? why doesn't anywhere have their app downloadable from the internet or something?

was wondering this because lots of issues with apps seem to stem from having to comply with app store guidelines and whatnot. So why not avoid that problem and make the app available off the appstore? And if part of it is because they're easier to find in the appstore, why not do both? why not also offer the download on a website or something?

there's gotta be some reason why there's afaik no one who offers a download for their app without the appstore right?

There are absolutely other ways to get apps, and the one that springs immediately to mind is the F-Droid App Repository.

Sideloading is the process of loading an app that doesn't come from your phone's OS-approved app store. It's really easy on Android (basically just a couple of clicks) but requires jailbreaking on an iphone.

The reason more USERS don't sideload apps is risk: app stores put apps through at least nominal security checks to ensure that they aren't hosting malware. If you get an app from the app store that is malware, you can report it and it will get taken down, but nobody is forcing some random developer who developed his own app to remove it from his site if it installs malware on your phone unless you get law enforcement involved.

The reason more developers don't go outside of the app store or don't WANT to go outside of the app store is money. The number of users who are going to sideload apps is *tiny* compared to the number of users who will go through the app store; that makes a HUGE difference in terms of income, so most developers try to keep it app-store friendly. Like, if tumblr were to say "fuck the app store" and just release their own app that you could download from the sidebar a few things would happen:

Downloads would drop to a fraction of their prior numbers instantly

iOS users would largely be locked out of using tumblr unless they fuck with their phones in a way that violates Apple's TOS and could get them booted out of their iOS ecosystem if they piss off the wrong people.

Ad revenue would collapse because not a lot of advertisers want to work with companies that are app-store unfriendly

They'd be kicked off of the main app marketplaces

So most people who develop apps don't want to put the time and effort and money into developing an app that people might not pay for that then also can't carry ads.

Which leads into another issue: the kind of people who generally make and use sideloaded app aren't the kind of people who generally like profit-driven models. Indie apps are often slow to update and have minimal support because you're usually dealing with a tiny team of creators with a userbase of people who can almost certainly name ten flavors of Linux and are thus expected to troubleshoot and solve their own problems.

If this is the kind of thing you want to try, have at it. I'd recommend sticking to apps from the F-Droid Repository linked up above and being judicious about what you install. If you're using apple and would have to jailbreak your phone to get a non-approved app on it, I'd recommend switching to another type of phone.

(For the record, you also aren't limited to android or ios as the operating system of your phone; there are linux-based OSs out there and weird mutations of android and such - I am not really a phone person so I can't tell you much about them, but they are out there!)

[sirfrogsworth]

If someone cares that much about the OS of my phone... I would call that dodging a bullet. You are not in the realm of intelligence that I find attractive.

This goes both ways though. I have seen nerds act like they had some moral high ground because they resisted the temptation of an Apple product.

Brand loyalty is stupid.

With an iPhone you get a difficult to repair item stuck in a walled garden.

With Android you are carrying a powerful advertising platform wherever you go that will jump at every opportunity to collect your data if you are not careful and do not explicitly tell it not to.

Pick your poison.

[mantisfriendd]

Ok so I talked about this in tags of a post earlier but I need to talk about it properly

So a couple weeks ago I finally pulled the trigger, I dual booted Linux Mint on my laptop

It has less of my vital files on it then my pc, but I use it more for videos and general Internet stuff, so I would know if I liked it

Installing was scary but after a bit of trouble shooting with disabling bit locker it was easy, and let me be clear, that's a windows thing, because Microsoft really really doesn't want you to have freedom over your machine.

So I booted in

And like

I literally love it so much

I knew people talked about how much better Linux is and how it speeds up literally anything it's put on over windows, but like WOW

It doesn't take 2 minutes to boot up or shut down, my CPU doesn't idle at 25% for no reason, the search for files feature doesn't take 40 minutes only to show me Internet results instead of files, its wonderful.

The default theme is (in my opinion) pretty ugly, sorry whoever made it, it's just not for me.

But that's the great thing, you can literally customize this almost however you would like.

Maybe you shouldn't trust my opinion on what looks nice because I instantly installed a theme that replicated Windows 7

But I got bored of the default colors so I literally found the files where the home bar is saved and changed them to be more "minty"

That along with some CSS color editing gave me this:

You just can't do anything like this in Windows 10/11. You can change the color on windows but if I wanted, in Mint, I could completely change everything, centered icons on the taskbar, icons left justified on the taskbar, no taskbar, make it look like windows 95, it's all yours to do with whatever you want.

There are issues, I won't lie, the biggest one that will probably haunt Linux forever is compatibility.

Simply put most developers don't make native Linux versions of their software, you are lucky if there is a Mac version.

Lots and lots of Windows software CAN work on Linux through compatibility layers like Wine and Steam's Proton, but it's not 100%

My biggest problem is FL Studio and Clip Studio, neither of these I could get working with Wine or Proton so far. I'm hoping in the future I will find a way to make this work, or transition to their free and open source alternatives, but for now I'm stuck with a win 10 pc.

The other issue I've faced is that Linux seems to have a hard time recognizing and remembering my wired headphones. Like sometimes it just works, but most of the time it fails to do so.

My solution to this until I have time to troubleshoot more is to use my stupid headphone jack to USB C dongle that I bought for my stupid phone with no headphone jack.

Luckily it works fine and the type C port on my laptop literally doesn't get used otherwise.

All in all, I'm like excited to use a computer again. I used to only be excited for the programs it allowed me to use, but for the first time in a long time, the "magic" of the PC has returned for me.

Once I save up the money, my next PC will be Linux, Windows doesn't cut it anymore for me.

Ok now I'm going to kinda just talk about Linux for a bit, unrelated to my experience because my brain has been buzzing about this topic lately.

I get why guys who run Linux are so annoying about it now, because it's me now, I love this stupid OS and everyone has to hear about it.

And chances are, you've used Linux before already!

Linux is used in a ridiculous number of places because of its open source nature.

Most servers and other cloud computing systems are running Linux, many public terminals and screens run Linux, every supercomputer in the world runs Linux, if you were in the education system for the past 13~ years you might have used ChromeOS, which is built on Linux, if you have ever used an Android device you have used Linux.

It's never going to take over Windows as the go to operating system in the home, most people don't even know they could switch, and if they don't know that there's no way they are willing to put up with some of the headaches Linux brings.

Although I've spent way more time troubleshooting Windows issues then I have Linux ones so far, so maybe Microsoft stuffing so much bloated spyware into their system is starting to cause windows to rip at the seams, idk.

When I try to explain Linux to people who literally don't understand any of this I use a car metaphor

Windows is like a hatchback SUV, you buy it from a dealer and it mostly works for everyone good enough that they don't complain.

Linux is like a project vehicle in a lot of ways, the mechanic can tune it up exactly to the specifications they want, tear a bit out and put a diffrent one in, it requires some work under the engine but once that mechanic gets it the way they want it, it's incredible.

It's not a perfect metaphor but I think it gets the idea across.

Uh IDK how to finish this post, please try Linux if you can, changed my life.