hackslash dot org

KOReader: Open-Source eBook Reader

Posted: 2025-03-31 19:52:29

KOReader is a free and open-source document viewer focused on e-ink devices like Kobo, Kindle, PocketBook, and Android. It emphasizes comfortable reading, offering features like customizable fonts, margins, and line spacing, along with extensive dictionary integration, footnote support, and various text-to-speech options. KOReader supports a wide range of document formats, including PDF, EPUB, MOBI, DjVu, CBZ, and CBR. The project aims to provide a flexible and feature-rich reading experience tailored to the unique demands of e-ink displays.

KOReader is a sophisticated, open-source software application meticulously designed for reading electronic books (eBooks) and other digital documents. It prioritizes a distraction-free reading experience and offers a remarkably customizable interface tailored to the needs of discerning readers. KOReader is platform-agnostic, functioning seamlessly across a diverse range of devices, including dedicated e-readers like the Kobo, Kindle, and PocketBook, as well as more general-purpose platforms such as desktop and laptop computers running Linux, Windows, or macOS, and mobile devices powered by Android or iOS.

The project emphasizes modularity and extensibility, enabling users to personalize their reading environment through various plugins and customization options. Its feature set extends beyond basic document rendering, encompassing support for a plethora of file formats, including common eBook formats like EPUB, MOBI, PDF, CBZ, and CBR, as well as DjVu, FB2, and HTML. Advanced typographical controls are also a hallmark of KOReader, providing readers with fine-grained control over font selection, line spacing, margins, and justification, fostering an optimized reading experience tailored to individual preferences.

Beyond static text, KOReader embraces dynamic content and interactive elements. It offers integrated support for dictionaries and translation services, allowing readers to seamlessly look up unfamiliar words or phrases. Furthermore, KOReader integrates with network services for syncing reading progress, bookmarks, and annotations across multiple devices. Its architecture facilitates seamless integration with online catalogs like OPDS, providing convenient access to vast libraries of digital content.

The development of KOReader adheres to open-source principles, fostering community involvement and transparency. The source code is freely available, allowing developers to contribute to the project, extend its functionality, and adapt it to emerging platforms and technologies. This open-source nature also ensures that users retain control over their reading experience, free from the constraints of proprietary software ecosystems. KOReader champions user privacy and data security by minimizing data collection and offering options for local storage and offline usage. In summary, KOReader represents a powerful, flexible, and privacy-respecting eBook reader solution tailored to the needs of power users and those seeking a highly customizable and extensible reading experience.

Summary of Comments ( 69 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43539103

HN users praise KOReader for its customizability, speed, and support for a wide range of document formats. Several commenters highlight its excellent PDF handling, especially for scientific papers and technical documents, contrasting it favorably with other readers. Some appreciate its minimalist UI and focus on reading, while others discuss advanced features like dictionaries and syncing. The ability to run on older and less powerful hardware is also mentioned as a plus. A few users mention minor issues or desired features, like improved EPUB reflow, but overall the sentiment is very positive, with many long-time users chiming in to recommend it. One commenter notes its particular usefulness for reading academic papers and textbooks, praising its ability to handle complex layouts and annotations.

The Hacker News post discussing KOReader, an open-source ebook reader, has generated a moderate amount of discussion. Several commenters share their experiences and opinions on the software.

A recurring theme is appreciation for KOReader's customizability and feature set. One user highlights its support for network libraries like OPDS, which allows accessing online catalogs of ebooks. They also praise its dictionary integration and ability to customize fonts and margins, features they find lacking in other readers. Another commenter specifically praises the software's performance on older, less powerful devices, noting its smooth operation even on a Kobo Mini.

Several users discuss the benefits of KOReader's platform agnosticism. Its ability to run on various devices, including e-ink readers, Android tablets, and desktops, is seen as a significant advantage. One commenter points out how this flexibility allows them to seamlessly switch between devices while maintaining their reading progress.

There's a discussion thread focusing on KOReader's development and community. One user expresses interest in contributing to the project and asks about the development process. Another commenter mentions the active community supporting the software, which is perceived positively.

A few comments touch upon specific technical aspects. One user discusses using KOReader with a reMarkable tablet and the associated challenges. Another mentions the platform's support for various document formats, including PDF and DjVu.

While mostly positive, some comments also mention areas for improvement. One user suggests enhancements to the user interface, particularly for initial setup and configuration.

Overall, the comments paint a picture of KOReader as a powerful and versatile ebook reader appreciated for its flexibility, customizability, and active community. While there are suggestions for improvement, the general sentiment is positive, with users highlighting its advantages over other e-readers, especially for those seeking a more customizable and open-source solution.

Google makes Android development private, will continue open source releases

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-26 19:21:51

Google is shifting internal Android development to a private model, similar to how it develops other products. While Android will remain open source, the day-to-day development process will no longer be publicly visible. Google claims this change will improve efficiency and security. The company insists this won't affect the open-source nature of Android, promising continued AOSP releases and collaboration with external partners. They anticipate no changes to the public bug tracker, release schedules, or the overall openness of the platform itself.

In a move that has stirred discussion, Google has restructured its approach to Android development, shifting a significant portion of the process behind closed doors while simultaneously reaffirming its commitment to the open-source nature of the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). This represents a nuanced alteration in strategy, not a complete abandonment of open development. Essentially, Google will now conduct the majority of its Android development work internally, privately iterating and refining new features and functionalities. This internal development cycle will involve the creation of private branches of the Android codebase, allowing Google engineers to work independently and at a potentially faster pace, free from the immediate scrutiny and constraints of public collaboration.

Following this internal development phase, Google will then merge these privately developed features and changes into the public AOSP repository. This "gated" model of development ensures that while the core development process is held privately, the resulting code remains accessible to the open-source community, manufacturers, and developers. This strategy aims to strike a balance between Google's desire for greater control over the development roadmap and timeline, and the benefits of maintaining an open-source ecosystem.

The article highlights that this change will not affect the open-source licensing of Android or the ability of manufacturers and developers to customize and distribute the operating system. AOSP will continue to serve as the foundation upon which Android is built, with Google contributing its internally developed changes back to the public project. The shift towards a more internal, private development model is primarily intended to streamline Google's internal processes, potentially allowing for faster iteration and more cohesive implementation of new features. It also potentially affords Google greater control over the direction of Android's development, mitigating fragmentation and ensuring a more unified user experience across devices. However, this change also raises questions regarding the degree of influence the broader community will have on the future of Android, and whether this shift signals a broader trend towards a more centralized development model within the open-source ecosystem. The article emphasizes that Google remains committed to open source, but the long-term implications of this change in development strategy remain to be seen.

Summary of Comments ( 14 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43485950

Hacker News users largely expressed skepticism and concern over Google's shift towards internal Android development. Many questioned whether "open source releases" would truly remain open if Google's internal development diverged significantly, leading to a de facto closed-source model similar to iOS. Some worried about potential stagnation of the platform, with fewer external contributions and slower innovation. Others saw it as a natural progression for a maturing platform, focusing on stability and polish over rapid feature additions. A few commenters pointed out the potential benefits, such as improved security and consistency through tighter control. The prevailing sentiment, however, was cautious pessimism about the long-term implications for Android's openness and community involvement.

The Hacker News post discussing Ars Technica's article "Google makes Android development private, will continue open source releases" has generated a substantial discussion with diverse viewpoints.

Several commenters express skepticism about Google's claim that this move will improve efficiency and security. They argue that hiding the development process reduces transparency and makes it harder for the community to identify and report potential issues. Some suggest this is a move towards greater control over Android's direction, potentially limiting customization options and favoring Google's own services. The comparison to Apple's closed-source iOS development is made multiple times, with concerns raised about the potential for a similar ecosystem developing around Android.

A recurring theme is the perceived disconnect between Google's open-source rhetoric and its actions. Commenters point to past instances where Google has seemingly abandoned or de-emphasized open-source projects, leading to distrust of their long-term commitment to Android's openness. Some speculate that this shift might be driven by competitive pressures or a desire to streamline development, even at the cost of community involvement.

Some commenters offer a more nuanced perspective, acknowledging the potential benefits of a more centralized development model while still expressing reservations. They suggest that faster iteration and improved security are indeed possible, but emphasize the importance of continued community engagement and transparency in the open-source releases. The idea that Google might be shifting towards a "hybrid" approach, where core development is private but contributions and feedback are still welcomed, is discussed.

A few commenters focus on the practical implications for developers, particularly those working on custom ROMs or contributing to AOSP. Concerns are raised about the potential difficulties in understanding and adapting to changes made behind closed doors. The impact on the broader Android ecosystem, including device manufacturers and app developers, is also discussed.

Finally, some comments offer more cynical interpretations, suggesting that this move is primarily motivated by a desire to limit fragmentation and exert greater control over the Android platform. The potential for increased monetization through tighter integration with Google's services is also mentioned.

Overall, the comments reflect a mixture of skepticism, concern, and cautious optimism about the future of Android development. While some see potential benefits in a more centralized approach, the majority express reservations about the implications for transparency, community involvement, and the long-term health of the open-source ecosystem.

Google will develop Android OS behind closed doors starting next week

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-26 18:01:51

Starting next week, Google will significantly reduce public access to the Android Open Source Project (AOSP) development process. Key parts of the next Android release's development, including platform changes and internal testing, will occur in private. While the source code will eventually be released publicly as usual, the day-to-day development and decision-making will be hidden from the public eye. This shift aims to improve efficiency and reduce early leaks of information about upcoming Android features. Google emphasizes that AOSP will remain open source, and they intend to enhance opportunities for external contributions through other avenues like quarterly platform releases and pre-release program expansions.

In a momentous shift that could reshape the future of the Android operating system, Google has announced its intention to transition the development of Android Open Source Project (AOSP) from its current, predominantly public model to a more closed, internal process. This transition, slated to commence in the week of March 31, 2025, signifies a significant departure from Google's long-standing approach of fostering open collaboration and community involvement in Android's evolution.

While specific details remain somewhat nebulous, the core implication is that a substantial portion of Android's underlying codebase development will now occur behind closed doors, within Google's internal teams. This move raises questions about the extent to which external developers and the wider Android community will be able to contribute to the platform's core functionalities moving forward.

The rationale behind this decision, as outlined by Google, appears to be centered on streamlining the development process and enhancing efficiency. The company suggests that by consolidating development internally, it can mitigate complexities arising from managing contributions from a vast and diverse external community. This, they argue, will facilitate quicker iterations, smoother integration of new features, and potentially a more cohesive overall experience for Android users.

However, this shift also raises concerns about potential impacts on transparency and community involvement. Historically, AOSP has thrived on the contributions of countless developers worldwide, who have played a crucial role in shaping Android into the ubiquitous platform it is today. The move to a more closed development model could restrict this external participation, potentially hindering innovation and limiting the diversity of perspectives that contribute to Android's evolution.

The precise ramifications of this change remain to be seen. Google has indicated that certain aspects of AOSP will remain open, allowing for continued community engagement in specific areas. However, the extent of this continued openness, and the specific mechanisms by which external developers can participate, remain to be clarified. The coming weeks and months will be crucial in understanding how this shift will impact the future trajectory of the Android operating system, and whether the purported benefits of increased efficiency will outweigh the potential drawbacks of reduced community involvement. The broader Android ecosystem, encompassing device manufacturers, app developers, and users alike, will be watching closely as this transition unfolds.

Summary of Comments ( 61 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484927

Hacker News commenters express concern over Google's move to develop Android AOSP primarily behind closed doors. Several suggest this signals a shift towards prioritizing Pixel features and potentially neglecting the broader Android ecosystem. Some worry this will stifle innovation and community contributions, leading to a more fragmented and less open Android experience. Others speculate this is a cost-cutting measure or a response to security concerns. A few commenters downplay the impact, believing open-source contributions were already minimal and Google's commitment to open source remains, albeit with a different approach. The discussion also touches upon the potential impact on custom ROM development and the future of AOSP's openness.

The Hacker News post "Google will develop Android OS behind closed doors starting next week" (linking to a 9to5Google article about changes in Android AOSP development) generated a significant number of comments discussing the implications of the shift to a more private development process.

Several commenters expressed concern that this change will negatively impact the open-source nature of Android. They argued that less public development means less community involvement, which could lead to slower bug detection, less innovation, and potentially a less secure operating system. Some worried that this move signals a broader shift away from Google's commitment to open source, possibly driven by competitive pressures or a desire for tighter control.

A few commenters drew parallels to other platforms and projects that have adopted similar private development models, speculating on whether Android might follow the same trajectory. Some pointed to the potential for fragmentation within the Android ecosystem if custom ROM development and community contributions are stifled.

Others offered a more nuanced perspective. They acknowledged potential downsides but also suggested that a more closed development process could have benefits, such as improved efficiency, faster release cycles, and better coordination within Google's development teams. Some suggested that Google might still maintain some level of transparency, even if the full development process isn't publicly visible. There was discussion around the distinction between "open source" and truly "open development", with some arguing that Android's open-source nature has been somewhat superficial for a while, given the dominance of Google's own implementations and services.

A recurring theme was the question of what this means for custom ROM development and the wider Android modding community. Some worried that this change will make it significantly harder to build and maintain custom ROMs, limiting user choice and potentially harming innovation. Others were less concerned, pointing out that many custom ROMs are primarily based on AOSP anyway and suggesting that the impact might not be as dramatic as some fear.

Finally, several commenters focused on the security implications of this move. Some argued that less public scrutiny could lead to more vulnerabilities going unnoticed. Others countered that a more controlled development environment might actually enhance security by making it harder for malicious actors to exploit vulnerabilities during the development process.

Overall, the comments reflected a mix of concern, skepticism, and cautious optimism. Many expressed a desire for more clarity from Google about the specifics of this change and its long-term implications for the Android ecosystem.

Briar: Peer to Peer Encrypted Messaging

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-14 14:36:23

Briar is a messaging app designed for high-security and censored environments. It uses peer-to-peer encryption, meaning messages are exchanged directly between devices rather than through a central server. This decentralized approach eliminates single points of failure and surveillance. Briar can connect directly via Bluetooth or Wi-Fi in proximity, or through the Tor network for more distant contacts, further enhancing privacy. Users add contacts by scanning a QR code or sharing a link. While Briar prioritizes security, it also supports blogs and forums, fostering community building in challenging situations.

Briar is a messaging app designed with a strong focus on security, privacy, and availability, especially in challenging environments where internet access is unreliable or censored. It achieves this by employing a peer-to-peer architecture, eschewing centralized servers that can be targeted for surveillance or shutdown. Instead of relying on a single server to relay messages, Briar leverages a distributed network formed by the users themselves. Each user's device acts as a node in this network, forwarding messages towards their intended recipients.

This peer-to-peer system enhances privacy in several key ways. Firstly, it eliminates the central point of vulnerability presented by a traditional server. There's no single entity that can be compelled to hand over data or manipulate communication. Secondly, messages are end-to-end encrypted, meaning they are scrambled at the sender's device and only decrypted at the recipient's device. This prevents eavesdropping, even by other nodes in the Briar network that may be relaying the message. Briar uses well-established cryptographic protocols to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of these messages.

To establish connections within the network, Briar offers multiple options. Users can add contacts directly by scanning each other's QR codes or by exchanging contact information via Bluetooth. Alternatively, if two users have mutual connections already within the Briar network, those shared connections can serve as a bridge, enabling indirect contact addition. This approach allows users to connect even if they are not physically proximate or able to directly exchange information.

Briar also facilitates the creation of forums, which are essentially group chats designed for secure and private discussions. Like direct messages, forums are decentralized and rely on the peer-to-peer network for message dissemination. This avoids the potential vulnerabilities of centralized forum servers.

In situations where internet connectivity is unavailable, Briar can still function by utilizing Bluetooth or Wi-Fi networks. Devices within Bluetooth range can communicate directly, while devices on the same local Wi-Fi network can also exchange messages, effectively creating a localized mesh network independent of the wider internet. This offline functionality is particularly crucial in areas experiencing internet shutdowns or natural disasters, ensuring lines of communication can remain open.

Furthermore, Briar is designed with security in mind, aiming to resist surveillance and censorship efforts. The peer-to-peer architecture and end-to-end encryption make it difficult for third parties to intercept or monitor communications. The decentralized nature of the network also makes it resilient against takedown attempts, as there is no single server to target. Briar is open-source software, allowing for independent auditing and verification of its security features. This transparency contributes to trust and ensures the community can scrutinize the code for potential vulnerabilities.

Summary of Comments ( 131 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43363031

Hacker News users discussed Briar's reliance on Tor for peer discovery, expressing concerns about its speed and reliability. Some questioned the practicality of Bluetooth and Wi-Fi mesh networking as a fallback, doubting its range and usability. Others were interested in the technical details of Briar's implementation, particularly its use of SQLite and the lack of end-to-end encryption for blog posts. The closed-source nature of the Android app was also raised as a potential issue, despite the project being open source overall. Several commenters compared Briar to other secure messaging apps like Signal and Session, highlighting trade-offs between usability and security. Finally, there was some discussion of the project's funding and its potential use cases in high-risk environments.

The Hacker News post titled "Briar: Peer to Peer Encrypted Messaging" linking to Briar Project's "how it works" page generated a moderate amount of discussion, with several commenters expressing interest in the project and its technical aspects.

A recurring theme is Briar's unique approach to peer-to-peer communication, which avoids relying on central servers. Several comments delve into the specifics of this, comparing it to other messaging apps like Signal and Session. One commenter points out that Briar "uses Bluetooth and wifi-direct for local communication" when internet connectivity is unavailable, distinguishing it from apps that rely solely on internet access. Another commenter elaborates on this, explaining how this feature enables communication in "challenging network environments" like protests or areas with internet censorship.

The discussion also touches on the trade-offs of this decentralized approach. A commenter highlights the "higher barrier to entry" due to the need for direct connections or a trusted contact already on the network, contrasting it with the ease of joining centralized platforms. Another acknowledges the potential difficulty in discovering and adding contacts.

Security and privacy are also prominent in the discussion. Commenters discuss the encryption methods employed by Briar and its resistance to surveillance. One commenter inquires about metadata leaks, specifically regarding "Bluetooth broadcast device names," raising concerns about potential identification even with encrypted messages.

Furthermore, the conversation drifts towards the practical usability of Briar. Commenters discuss its interface and user experience, with some expressing a desire for a more polished design. The limited platform support (Android only at the time of the comments) is also mentioned. A commenter expresses interest in iOS and desktop support, indicating a demand for broader accessibility.

Finally, some comments provide additional context, mentioning related projects like Ricochet Refresh and the challenges of building truly decentralized and secure communication systems. One commenter mentions the historical precedent of "sneakernet" as a precursor to Briar's approach.

In summary, the comments section demonstrates a significant interest in Briar's decentralized approach to secure messaging, while also acknowledging the practical challenges and trade-offs involved. The discussion focuses heavily on the technical aspects, comparing Briar to existing solutions and exploring its potential use cases in situations where traditional communication channels are unavailable or compromised.

Apple will soon support encrypted RCS messaging with Android users

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-14 12:07:06

Apple is reportedly planning to add support for encrypted Rich Communication Services (RCS) messaging between iPhones and Android devices. This means messages, photos, and videos sent between the two platforms will be end-to-end encrypted, providing significantly more privacy and security than the current SMS/MMS system. While no official timeline has been given, the implementation appears to be dependent on Google updating its Messages app to support encryption for group chats. This move would finally bring a modern, secure messaging experience to cross-platform communication, replacing the outdated SMS standard.

In a significant development for cross-platform communication, Apple appears poised to finally address a long-standing grievance among Android users: the lack of seamless, secure messaging between iPhones and Android devices. The Verge reports that Apple is actively working to incorporate support for Rich Communication Services (RCS) messaging with end-to-end encryption (E2EE), potentially bridging the gap between the iMessage ecosystem and the Android world. This means that messages exchanged between iPhones and Android devices will be protected by robust encryption, preventing third-party interception and ensuring privacy for users on both platforms.

Currently, messages sent between iPhones and Android phones rely on the antiquated SMS/MMS standard, which lacks modern features such as read receipts, high-quality image and video sharing, and, most importantly, end-to-end encryption. This has led to a fragmented and often frustrating user experience, particularly for Android users who are often subject to the "green bubble" stigma and experience diminished message quality. The implementation of RCS with E2EE by Apple would effectively modernize cross-platform communication, offering a comparable experience to iMessage conversations, complete with enhanced features and the crucial security of encryption. This would represent a substantial improvement over the existing system, alleviating the technical limitations and social implications associated with the current cross-platform messaging disparity.

While Apple has not officially announced a timeline for this implementation, the reporting suggests it's a matter of "when," not "if." This move, if realized, could dramatically reshape the landscape of mobile messaging, providing a unified and secure communication platform for users regardless of their operating system. It signifies a potential shift in Apple's strategy, which has previously been perceived as leveraging iMessage's exclusivity as a competitive advantage. By embracing RCS with E2EE, Apple could foster a more interoperable messaging ecosystem, benefiting users across the mobile landscape.

Summary of Comments ( 15 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43361822

Hacker News commenters generally expressed skepticism about Apple's purported move towards supporting encrypted RCS messaging. Several doubted Apple's sincerity, suggesting it's a PR move to deflect criticism about iMessage lock-in, rather than a genuine commitment to interoperability. Some pointed out that Apple benefits from the "green bubble" effect, which pressures users to stay within the Apple ecosystem. Others questioned the technical details of Apple's implementation, highlighting the complexities of key management and potential vulnerabilities. A few commenters welcomed the move, though with reservations, hoping it's a genuine step toward better cross-platform messaging. Overall, the sentiment leaned towards cautious pessimism, with many anticipating further "Apple-style" limitations and caveats in their RCS implementation.

The Hacker News post titled "Apple will soon support encrypted RCS messaging with Android users" generated a significant number of comments discussing various aspects of the news. Several commenters expressed skepticism about Apple's motivations, suggesting that they might be driven more by regulatory pressure, particularly in the EU, than a genuine desire to improve interoperability. Some pointed to Apple's business model, arguing that iMessage lock-in is a key factor in maintaining their ecosystem and that true interoperability could threaten that.

A recurring theme in the discussion revolves around the technical details and potential limitations of Apple's implementation. Commenters debated whether Apple would fully embrace the RCS standard or implement a limited version that maintains some advantages for iMessage users. Concerns were raised about features like read receipts and typing indicators, and whether these would function seamlessly across platforms. The potential for Apple to utilize its own servers for relaying messages, rather than relying on Google's Jibe platform, was also discussed, along with the implications for privacy and security.

Several comments highlighted the complexities of implementing end-to-end encryption (E2EE) in a cross-platform messaging system. Some users expressed concerns about the potential vulnerabilities and challenges of maintaining security across different operating systems and devices.

Another thread of discussion focused on the broader implications of this change for the messaging landscape. Some commenters speculated on how this might affect other messaging platforms like WhatsApp and Signal, and whether it could lead to greater interoperability across the industry.

Some users shared personal anecdotes about the frustrations of the current messaging situation between iOS and Android, expressing hope that this change would improve communication and eliminate the "green bubble" stigma. Others, however, remained pessimistic, believing that Apple would find ways to maintain the advantages of iMessage and prevent true parity with Android messaging.

Finally, several comments delved into the history of messaging standards and the role of various companies in shaping the current landscape. Some blamed carriers for their resistance to adopting open standards, while others criticized Apple for their perceived reluctance to embrace interoperability.

Lynx: Open Source Native Cross Platform framework used in TikTok

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-05 10:25:55

Lynx is an open-source, high-performance cross-platform framework developed by ByteDance and used in production by TikTok. It leverages a proprietary JavaScript engine tailored for mobile environments, enabling faster startup times and reduced memory consumption compared to traditional JavaScript engines. Lynx prioritizes a native-first experience, utilizing platform-specific UI rendering for optimal performance and a familiar user interface on each operating system. It offers developers a unified JavaScript API to access native capabilities, allowing them to build complex applications with near-native performance and a consistent look and feel across different platforms like Android, iOS, and other embedded systems. The framework also supports code sharing with React Native for increased developer efficiency.

The blog post "Lynx: Unlock Native for More" on the lynxjs.org website announces and elaborates on the open-sourcing of Lynx, a native cross-platform framework developed and utilized by TikTok. Lynx aims to empower developers to build high-performance, visually appealing applications for a variety of platforms—including iOS, Android, Windows, macOS, and Linux—using familiar web technologies like JavaScript, HTML, CSS, and popular frontend frameworks such as React, Vue, and SolidJS.

The post emphasizes Lynx's unique approach to cross-platform development. Instead of relying on a WebView or JavaScript bridge, which can introduce performance bottlenecks, Lynx leverages a custom rendering engine that translates web code directly into native instructions. This architecture allows Lynx applications to achieve near-native performance levels while maintaining the flexibility and ease of development associated with web technologies. Furthermore, it enables developers to seamlessly integrate native modules and libraries into their Lynx projects, further enhancing functionality and platform-specific customization.

The blog post highlights several key benefits of using Lynx. These include its rapid development cycle, facilitated by the use of familiar web technologies and hot reloading features; its impressive performance, derived from its direct native rendering approach; its truly cross-platform nature, enabling deployment to a wide range of operating systems; and its robust ecosystem, offering access to numerous libraries and frameworks from the web development world.

TikTok’s own utilization of Lynx for several in-app features serves as a testament to the framework's capabilities in a production environment. The blog post details how Lynx helped TikTok improve development efficiency, reduce application size, and deliver a consistent user experience across different platforms.

The decision to open-source Lynx is presented as a move to foster community growth and collaboration. By making the framework publicly available, the developers hope to encourage contributions, expand the platform's reach, and empower a wider range of developers to build high-quality native applications. The post encourages developers to explore the framework, contribute to its development, and join the growing Lynx community. It also provides links to the project's GitHub repository and documentation for those interested in getting started. In essence, the announcement positions Lynx as a powerful new tool in the cross-platform development landscape, promising a blend of performance, flexibility, and ease of use.

Summary of Comments ( 6 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43264957

HN commenters discuss Lynx's performance, ease of use, and potential. Some express excitement about its native performance and cross-platform capabilities, especially for mobile and desktop development. Others question its maturity and the practicality of using JavaScript for computationally intensive tasks, comparing it to React Native and Flutter. Several users raise concerns about long-term maintenance and community support, given its connection to ByteDance (TikTok's parent company). One commenter suggests exploring Tauri as an alternative for native desktop development. The overall sentiment seems cautiously optimistic, with many interested in trying Lynx but remaining skeptical until more real-world examples and feedback emerge.

The Hacker News post discussing Lynx, an open-source native cross-platform framework used by TikTok, has generated a moderate number of comments, primarily focusing on comparisons to other cross-platform solutions, potential benefits and drawbacks of the framework, and some discussion of its usage within TikTok itself.

Several commenters draw parallels between Lynx and React Native, highlighting the similar declarative UI approach. One commenter questions the performance benefits of Lynx over React Native, particularly regarding JavaScript execution and bridge overheads, which are often performance bottlenecks in React Native applications. This spurs a discussion about the efficiency of the JavaScript runtime used by Lynx and whether it offers tangible advantages over React Native's architecture.

Another thread discusses the implications of TikTok's involvement with Lynx. Some express skepticism, questioning whether TikTok genuinely utilizes Lynx extensively or if it's more of a side project. Others speculate about the reasons behind TikTok open-sourcing Lynx, suggesting it could be a strategic move to foster community development and potentially alleviate maintenance burdens.

The licensing of Lynx also comes under scrutiny. A commenter points out the potential complexities and restrictions associated with the custom license chosen for the project, contrasting it with more permissive open-source licenses like MIT. This raises concerns about the ease of adoption and potential legal implications for developers considering using Lynx in their projects.

Performance and the "native" aspect of Lynx are recurring themes. Commenters debate the true meaning of "native" in this context, with some arguing that relying on JavaScript still introduces limitations compared to truly native development. The efficiency of JavaScript execution within Lynx, especially concerning complex UI interactions and animations, is also questioned.

Finally, a few commenters express interest in the potential of Lynx for desktop development, particularly its capability to target macOS. They inquire about the maturity and stability of the desktop support and the potential performance benefits compared to other cross-platform desktop solutions.

While there's no overwhelming consensus about Lynx's future or its position in the cross-platform landscape, the comments offer a diverse range of perspectives on its potential advantages, limitations, and the implications of its association with TikTok. Many express a wait-and-see attitude, wanting to observe further development and community adoption before forming definitive conclusions.

How Google tracks Android device users before they've even opened an app

permalink

Posted: 2025-03-04 11:16:47

The Register reports that Google collects and transmits Android user data, including hardware identifiers and location, to its servers even before a user opens any apps or completes device setup. This pre-setup data collection involves several Google services and occurs during the initial boot process, transmitting information like IMEI, hardware serial number, SIM serial number, and nearby Wi-Fi access point details. While Google claims this data is crucial for essential services like fraud prevention and software updates, the article raises privacy concerns, particularly because users are not informed of this data collection nor given the opportunity to opt out. This behavior raises questions about the balance between user privacy and Google's data collection practices.

A March 4th, 2025 article published by The Register, titled "How Google tracks Android device users before they've even opened an app," details research revealing how Google collects and transmits significant amounts of user data from Android devices, even prior to any application usage or user interaction. This pre-app data collection, occurring during the device setup phase and before a user logs in with a Google account, involves the transmission of unique identifiers such as hardware IDs, including the device's IMEI, MAC addresses for Wi-Fi and Bluetooth components, and various other build characteristics.

The research, conducted by Douglas Leith at Trinity College Dublin, highlights that this initial data transmission allows Google to link the device and its associated identifiers to a specific user once they eventually log in with their Google account. This effectively creates a detailed pre-profile of the device and its potential user, associating hardware specifics with a later-provided Google identity.

Leith’s study also underscores the discrepancy in data collection practices between Android and iOS. While both operating systems transmit some telemetry data during setup, Android is found to send significantly more information to Google, approximately 10 times the volume transmitted by iOS to Apple. This difference is particularly notable given the pre-login context, raising concerns about the extent of data collection before explicit user consent via account login.

Furthermore, the research indicates that data transmission to Google occurs not just during the initial setup but also when a factory reset is performed, essentially resetting the data collection process. This continuous gathering of pre-login data emphasizes the pervasive nature of Google's tracking mechanisms within the Android ecosystem. The collected information, which can be used to build a comprehensive profile of the device and its user, raises privacy implications, especially considering the data transmission occurs before users actively engage with any applications or explicitly agree to data sharing through account creation.

The article concludes by noting that this pre-app data collection practice allows Google to establish a link between a device and its eventual user even before any explicit interaction with Google services or applications. This preemptive data gathering raises questions about the transparency and user control over data sharing within the Android operating system.

Summary of Comments ( 22 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43253167

HN commenters discuss the implications of Google's data collection on Android even before app usage. Some highlight the irony of Google's privacy claims contrasted with their extensive tracking. Several express resignation, suggesting this behavior is expected from Google and other large tech companies. One commenter mentions a study showing Google collecting data even when location services are disabled, and another points to the difficulty of truly opting out of this tracking without significant technical knowledge. The discussion also touches upon the limitations of using alternative Android ROMs or de-Googled phones, acknowledging their usability compromises. There's a general sense of pessimism about the ability of users to control their data in the Android ecosystem.

The Hacker News post discussing The Register's article about Google's Android tracking practices has generated a substantial discussion with various viewpoints and insights.

Several commenters express concerns about the extent of data collection occurring before users even interact with apps. They discuss the implications of pre-installed apps and system-level services sending data to Google, highlighting the potential privacy risks, especially for users unaware of this background activity. Some debate the necessity of this data collection for functionality versus Google's potential exploitation for advertising or other purposes. The discussion also touches upon the difficulty for users to opt out of this tracking, given its integration within the Android operating system itself.

One recurring theme is the comparison of Android's data collection practices to those of Apple's iOS. Commenters debate which operating system provides better privacy, with some arguing that Apple's approach is more transparent and user-centric. Others point out that both companies collect significant user data, albeit through different mechanisms.

A few commenters delve into the technical aspects of the data collection, discussing the role of Firebase Cloud Messaging (FCM) and other system-level components. They explain how these components facilitate communication between devices and Google servers, enabling features like push notifications but also potentially contributing to the pre-app usage data collection.

The discussion also extends to the broader issue of data privacy in the tech industry. Commenters express frustration with the lack of control users have over their data and the pervasive nature of tracking across various platforms and services. Some advocate for stronger regulations and greater transparency from tech companies regarding data collection practices.

There are also more skeptical comments questioning the novelty or significance of the findings in The Register's article. Some suggest that this type of background data transmission is inherent in modern mobile operating systems and necessary for basic functionality. They argue that the article might be overstating the privacy implications or presenting information already known within the tech community.

Finally, some commenters offer practical advice for users concerned about privacy, such as using alternative ROMs like LineageOS or exploring privacy-focused mobile operating systems like GrapheneOS. They discuss the trade-offs between functionality and privacy, acknowledging that more privacy-centric options may require technical expertise or involve sacrificing certain features.

The Amazon Appstore for Android devices will be discontinued on August 20, 2025

permalink

Posted: 2025-02-20 11:13:46

Amazon is shutting down its Appstore for Android devices on August 20, 2025. Users will no longer be able to download or update apps from the Appstore after this date, and some services associated with existing apps may also cease functioning. Amazon will refund any remaining Amazon Coins balance. Developers will continue to be paid royalties for existing apps until the shutdown date. While Amazon states they're shifting focus to Fire tablets and Fire TV, the actual Android Appstore listing has been pulled from the Google Play Store, and development of new Android apps for submission is now discouraged.

Amazon has formally announced the impending cessation of its dedicated Android application storefront, the Amazon Appstore, slated for August 20, 2025. This signifies the end of availability for downloading new apps from the Amazon Appstore and the termination of support for existing apps acquired through the platform. After the specified date, users will no longer be able to access, download, or receive updates for applications obtained via the Amazon Appstore. This includes apps installed on Fire tablets, Fire TVs, and any Android-based mobile devices utilizing the Appstore.

This decision follows a thorough evaluation of Amazon's app distribution strategy and aligns with the company's overarching goals. While the Amazon Appstore itself is being discontinued for Android devices, the company emphasizes its continued commitment to the app ecosystem, particularly focusing on Android-based Fire devices. Amazon intends to enhance the native app experience on Fire tablets and Fire TVs, streamlining the process of discovering and enjoying applications through the integrated Amazon experience. This implies a shift towards pre-installed apps and a more curated selection of software tailored specifically for Amazon's hardware ecosystem.

For developers who have published apps on the Amazon Appstore, this closure presents a significant change. Amazon encourages these developers to transition their focus towards creating and distributing apps through the Amazon Fire TV and Fire tablet app stores. This suggests a consolidation of resources and a directed effort towards enhancing the software experience on Amazon's proprietary devices. Developers are advised to adapt their distribution strategies accordingly and prioritize these platforms for future app development.

Users who have previously purchased applications from the Amazon Appstore will, unfortunately, lose access to these apps after the discontinuation date. While Amazon hasn't elaborated on specific refund policies, the FAQ indicates that they are working to address this issue and will provide further information closer to the shutdown date. This suggests potential avenues for users to reclaim some value from their past app purchases, although the precise mechanisms for this remain unclear.

In essence, Amazon is strategically refocusing its app efforts towards its own hardware platform, choosing to streamline the app experience for Fire devices while sunsetting the broader Android Appstore offering. This change signals a departure from the company's previous approach of catering to a wider Android audience and emphasizes a renewed commitment to its own ecosystem.

Summary of Comments ( 121 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43113397

Hacker News users react to the Amazon Appstore shutdown with a mixture of apathy and mild surprise. Many point out the store's general irrelevance, citing its limited selection and lack of discoverability compared to the Google Play Store. Some speculate about Amazon's motivations, suggesting they're refocusing resources on more profitable ventures or admitting defeat in the mobile app market. A few users express disappointment, having used the store for specific apps unavailable elsewhere or to take advantage of Amazon Coins promotions. The overall sentiment suggests the closure won't significantly impact the Android ecosystem.

The Hacker News post "The Amazon Appstore for Android devices will be discontinued on August 20, 2025" has generated several comments discussing the implications of Amazon's decision.

Many commenters express a lack of surprise at the news, citing the app store's perceived lack of popularity and competitiveness against the Google Play Store. Some suggest that the Amazon Appstore primarily served as a platform for Amazon's own apps and services, such as Kindle and Audible, and its closure won't significantly impact most Android users.

Several comments highlight the challenges faced by alternative app stores on Android, pointing to Google's dominance and the difficulties in attracting developers and users. Some speculate that the regulatory scrutiny surrounding app store practices may have played a role in Amazon's decision.

A few commenters discuss the potential impact on developers who relied on the Amazon Appstore for distribution, especially those targeting Amazon's Fire tablets. They raise concerns about the loss of an alternative distribution channel and the potential difficulties in migrating users to other platforms.

One commenter questions the long-term viability of alternative app stores in general, suggesting that the network effects of the dominant platforms make it difficult for smaller players to compete.

Some users express indifference to the news, indicating they were unaware of the Amazon Appstore's existence or never used it.

A few commenters express disappointment, mentioning specific features they appreciated about the Amazon Appstore, such as the occasional free app offer. They lament the loss of choice and competition in the Android app store ecosystem.

Overall, the sentiment in the comments is largely one of resignation and unsurprise. The Amazon Appstore's closure is viewed as a consequence of its inability to gain significant traction against the Google Play Store, highlighting the challenges faced by alternative app stores in the Android ecosystem.

Saying Goodbye to FFmpegKit

permalink

Posted: 2025-02-14 21:53:40

Taner Şener, the creator of FFmpegKit, a commercial wrapper around FFmpeg for mobile development, announced that he's ceasing development and support. Due to complexities in maintaining FFmpeg across various architectures and operating systems, increasing maintenance burden, and inadequate revenue to justify continued development, he's chosen to shut down. Existing clients can continue using their purchased licenses, but future updates and support are discontinued. The core issue is the difficulty of sustainably supporting a complex project like FFmpegKit, even as a paid product, given the rapid pace of mobile development and the substantial engineering effort required for compatibility. While acknowledging the disappointment this will cause some users, Şener emphasizes the unsustainable nature of the project's current trajectory and thanks users for their support over the years.

Taner Şener, the creator of MobileFFmpeg and FFmpegKit, a widely used FFmpeg library for mobile development (Android and iOS), has announced the discontinuation of active development and support for FFmpegKit. This decision, explained in a Medium post titled "Saying Goodbye to FFmpegKit," stems from several key factors, primarily the unsustainable workload and financial strain of maintaining the project.

Şener details the extensive effort required to keep FFmpegKit up-to-date and functional. This includes regularly rebuilding FFmpeg for different architectures (armv7, arm64, x86, x86_64) across both Android and iOS platforms, dealing with the complexities of differing build systems (CMake, Xcode, NDK), and addressing the constant influx of issues and user requests. This maintenance burden, coupled with the continuous evolution of Apple's ecosystem, requiring adaptations to new devices, operating system versions, and silicon architectures, proved to be an overwhelming demand on Şener's time and resources.

The financial aspect also played a significant role. While MobileFFmpeg, a commercial offering with more advanced features, generated some revenue, it was insufficient to cover the costs associated with FFmpegKit's upkeep. The free and open-source nature of FFmpegKit meant that the majority of users did not contribute financially, leading to a situation where Şener was effectively subsidizing the project. The time commitment to FFmpegKit also hindered Şener's ability to dedicate time to MobileFFmpeg's advancement and explore other potentially more profitable ventures.

Despite the discontinuation of active development, Şener assures users that FFmpegKit will remain available for download and use. The existing documentation and resources will remain accessible. However, future updates, bug fixes, and support will not be provided. Şener expresses gratitude to the community for their support and contributions over the years and encourages users to consider transitioning to MobileFFmpeg if they require ongoing support and advanced features. The post ends with a reflective note on the challenges of maintaining open-source projects and the importance of sustainable models for long-term viability.

Summary of Comments ( 90 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43053499

Hacker News users discuss the author's decision to discontinue FFmpegKit, an iOS/Android FFmpeg library. Several commenters express disappointment, highlighting FFmpegKit's ease of use compared to alternatives like MobileFFmpeg. Some suggest the decision stems from the difficulty of maintaining cross-platform compatibility and the complex build process involved with FFmpeg. Others speculate about the author's motivation, including burnout or lack of financial viability. A few offer alternative solutions or express hope for a successor project. The lack of clear documentation for building FFmpeg directly is also a recurring concern, reinforcing the value of projects like FFmpegKit.

The Hacker News post titled "Saying Goodbye to FFmpegKit" has a moderate number of comments discussing the author's decision to discontinue the project and the broader implications for mobile FFmpeg integration.

Several commenters expressed appreciation for the author's work on FFmpegKit, acknowledging the difficulty of maintaining such a project and thanking him for his contributions to the community. One commenter specifically mentioned gratitude for the clear explanation provided by the author regarding the challenges faced.

A key theme in the discussion revolves around the complexities and frustrations of cross-compiling FFmpeg, particularly for mobile platforms. Commenters echoed the author's sentiments about the time-consuming nature of this process and the constant struggle to keep up with updates and changes. One commenter highlighted the constant need to chase new NDK versions and the resulting instability as a major pain point.

The licensing issues surrounding FFmpeg and its dependencies were also brought up. One commenter pointed out the potential legal risks involved in using FFmpeg in commercial projects due to the GPL license and the complexities of ensuring compliance.

Some commenters discussed alternative approaches to using FFmpeg on mobile, including MobileFFmpeg, which was mentioned as a potential option, although some skepticism was expressed regarding its long-term viability. The challenges of maintaining such projects, especially given the dynamic nature of FFmpeg and mobile platforms, were a recurring theme.

A few commenters also touched upon the broader challenges of native development on mobile and the increasing appeal of cross-platform frameworks like Flutter. While not directly related to FFmpegKit, this reflects the evolving landscape of mobile development and the factors that might influence the adoption of tools and libraries like FFmpegKit.

Finally, there's a brief discussion on the reasons behind the increasing complexity of cross-compilation. One commenter speculated that the increasing modularization of projects and the deprecation of older APIs contribute to this growing difficulty.

Overall, the comments paint a picture of a dedicated developer grappling with the inherent complexities of maintaining a crucial but complex tool for mobile development, and a community grappling with the implications of its discontinuation.

Memfault (YC W19) Is Hiring an Android System (AOSP) Engineer

permalink

Posted: 2025-02-06 12:00:23

Memfault, a platform for monitoring and debugging connected devices, is seeking an experienced Android System (AOSP) engineer. This role involves working deeply within the Android Open Source Project to develop and improve Memfault's firmware over-the-air (FOTA) updating system and device monitoring capabilities. The ideal candidate possesses strong C/C++ skills, a deep understanding of AOSP internals, and experience with embedded systems, particularly in the realm of firmware updates and low-level debugging. This position offers the opportunity to contribute to a fast-growing startup and shape the future of device reliability.

Memfault, a company specializing in device firmware observability and debugging for embedded systems and IoT devices, and a participant in the Winter 2019 Y Combinator cohort, is actively seeking a highly skilled Android System (AOSP) Engineer to join their expanding team. This role presents a unique opportunity to contribute significantly to the development of Memfault's Android SDK and its integration with the Android Open Source Project (AOSP). The successful candidate will play a pivotal role in shaping the future of firmware debugging for Android-based devices.

This position demands a deep understanding of the Android operating system, particularly its lower levels, and extensive experience working with the AOSP. The ideal candidate will be proficient in C/C++ and possess a strong understanding of embedded systems concepts. They will be responsible for designing, developing, and maintaining the Memfault Android SDK, ensuring its seamless integration with the AOSP and its compatibility across a diverse range of Android devices. This includes optimizing performance, ensuring reliability, and tackling the intricate challenges posed by the fragmented Android ecosystem. A key aspect of the role involves working closely with the firmware team to enhance the interoperability between the Android SDK and Memfault's existing firmware observability platform.

Memfault offers a compelling compensation package, including a competitive salary, equity options, and comprehensive benefits. Beyond the financial rewards, the company provides a dynamic and stimulating work environment where collaboration, innovation, and personal growth are highly valued. The successful candidate will have the opportunity to work alongside a talented team of engineers, contributing to cutting-edge technology that is revolutionizing the embedded systems industry. The role entails considerable autonomy and ownership, allowing the engineer to directly impact the product and the company's trajectory. Moreover, Memfault fosters a remote-first work culture, empowering employees with flexibility and the ability to work from anywhere in the world.

The listed responsibilities include developing and maintaining the Memfault Android SDK, integrating it with AOSP, optimizing its performance, ensuring compatibility across various Android versions and hardware platforms, collaborating with the firmware team to enhance interoperability, and contributing to the ongoing evolution of Memfault’s device observability platform. The required qualifications encompass a strong proficiency in C/C++, significant experience with AOSP development, a deep understanding of embedded systems fundamentals, and excellent problem-solving skills. Familiarity with firmware development, experience with continuous integration and continuous deployment (CI/CD) practices, and knowledge of build systems are considered advantageous, although not strictly mandatory.

Summary of Comments ( 0 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42961562

Several commenters on Hacker News expressed interest in the Memfault position, inquiring about remote work possibilities and the specific nature of "low-level" work involved. Some discussion revolved around the challenges and rewards of working with AOSP, with one commenter highlighting the complexity and fragmentation of the Android ecosystem. Others noted the niche nature of embedded Android/AOSP development and the potential career benefits of specializing in this area. A few commenters also touched upon Memfault's business model and the value proposition of their product for embedded developers. One comment suggested exploring similar tools in the embedded Linux space, while another briefly discussed the intricacies of AOSP customization by different device manufacturers.

The Hacker News post titled "Memfault (YC W19) Is Hiring an Android System (AOSP) Engineer" linking to a Memfault job posting has generated a few comments, primarily focused on the perceived difficulty and niche nature of the role, along with some discussion about the company and the embedded systems domain.

One commenter highlights the demanding nature of AOSP work, stating that it requires a deep understanding of the Android system and a willingness to grapple with complex issues. They express the sentiment that finding qualified engineers for such roles is challenging due to the specialized knowledge required. This comment underscores the niche expertise required for AOSP development and subtly implies the job posting might be targeting a very select group of engineers.

Another commenter mentions their personal experience with embedded Linux and how it differs significantly from application-level Android development. This reinforces the specific skillset needed for this role and highlights that experience with general Android development isn't necessarily sufficient. They suggest the job requires a deep understanding of the lower-level system components, as opposed to the application framework that most Android developers interact with.

Another comment chain discusses the broader embedded systems domain and the types of engineers drawn to it. One user expresses the opinion that embedded systems work attracts a different type of engineer, one who enjoys a deeper understanding of hardware and lower-level software interactions. This echoes the sentiment that this isn't a typical Android developer role and that the ideal candidate likely possesses a passion for system-level programming. Another user then agrees with this assessment, specifically liking embedded work to understanding how a car engine functions as opposed to just driving. This analogy further emphasizes the hands-on, detailed-oriented nature of embedded systems work and implicitly suggests that this role at Memfault might appeal to engineers with similar inclinations.

Finally, one commenter simply expresses enthusiasm for Memfault as a company. This concise comment, although lacking in detail, offers a positive sentiment towards the company which could influence potential applicants.

While the comments are not extensive, they provide valuable insight into the perceived challenges and appeal of the advertised position, painting a picture of a specialized and demanding role that requires a particular type of engineer.

Waydroid – Android in a Linux container

permalink

Posted: 2025-02-02 19:29:45

Waydroid lets you run a full Android system in a container on your Linux desktop. It utilizes a modified version of LineageOS and leverages Wayland to integrate seamlessly with your existing Linux environment, allowing for both a full-screen Android experience and individual Android apps running as regular windows on your desktop. This allows access to a large library of Android apps while retaining the benefits and familiarity of a Linux desktop. Waydroid focuses on performance and integration, offering a more native-feeling Android experience compared to alternative solutions.

Waydroid is presented as a method to run a full Android system on a regular GNU/Linux distribution using containerization technology. Instead of employing full virtualization like a virtual machine, which can be resource-intensive, Waydroid leverages Linux containers (specifically LXC) to create a more lightweight and integrated Android environment. This containerized approach allows Android apps to run directly on the Linux desktop, sharing the kernel with the host system and theoretically offering improved performance and resource efficiency compared to traditional virtualization solutions.

The project's website emphasizes running Android apps on a Linux system, seamlessly integrating them with the host environment. This integration extends to aspects like notifications, which are displayed natively within the Linux desktop environment, as well as window management, enabling Android apps to appear as regular windows alongside native Linux applications. Furthermore, Waydroid aims for complete functionality, implying that, ideally, any Android application should run flawlessly within the containerized environment.

Waydroid employs a strategy involving an embedded Wayland compositor within the Android container. This compositor then communicates with the host system's Wayland compositor, facilitating the seamless window integration mentioned previously. This approach allows the Android apps to behave like native Linux applications in terms of window management, drag-and-drop functionality, and overall desktop integration.

The architecture description highlights the use of a custom image based on LineageOS, a popular open-source Android distribution. This image is optimized specifically for the containerized environment, likely stripping away unnecessary components and potentially adding enhancements to improve compatibility and performance within the Linux container. The use of LineageOS as a foundation suggests a focus on a relatively stock Android experience.

The website also hints at performance advantages due to the containerized approach, claiming a smaller footprint and improved speed compared to full virtualization. This is a key selling point of using containers over virtual machines, as containers share the host kernel and require fewer resources.

Finally, the project appears to be actively developed and maintained, evidenced by the availability of installation instructions and links to the project's source code. The presence of documentation suggests a commitment to providing users with the necessary resources to utilize Waydroid effectively. The overall tone implies a project aiming for a polished and user-friendly experience for running Android apps within a Linux environment.

Summary of Comments ( 12 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42911042

Hacker News users discussed Waydroid's resource usage, particularly RAM consumption, with some expressing concern about it being higher than native Android on compatible hardware. Several commenters questioned the project's advantages over alternative solutions like Anbox, Genymotion, or virtual machines, focusing on performance and potential use cases. Others shared their experiences using Waydroid, some praising its smooth functionality for specific apps while others encountered bugs or limitations. The discussion also touched on Waydroid's security implications compared to running a full Android VM, and its potential as a development or testing environment. A few users inquired about compatibility with various Linux distributions and desktop environments.

The Hacker News post titled "Waydroid – Android in a container" generated several comments discussing various aspects of the project. Many users expressed interest and enthusiasm for running Android apps on their Linux desktops, highlighting the potential convenience and increased functionality.

Several commenters compared Waydroid to other similar projects like Anbox, Genymotion, and Scrcpy. Some users who had experience with these alternatives offered insights into Waydroid's comparative advantages and disadvantages. Performance, ease of setup, and integration with the host desktop environment were frequent topics of comparison. Some suggested that Waydroid offered a more seamless and less resource-intensive experience than other solutions.

Several commenters delved into technical details, discussing Waydroid's implementation as a container, its use of Wayland, and the implications for security and performance. Some questioned the efficiency of containerization for this specific use case, while others lauded it for its potential to improve isolation and stability. There was discussion about the overhead introduced by the container compared to a more integrated approach.

The conversation also touched upon the potential for gaming and the compatibility of various Android apps. Some users expressed hope for a smoother gaming experience than with other Android emulation solutions, while others were more skeptical, citing potential performance bottlenecks. The question of compatibility with specific apps and games that rely on specific hardware features or Google Play Services was also raised.

Several users requested clarification on specific features and functionalities, such as how Waydroid handles notifications, file sharing, and clipboard integration with the host system. Other comments inquired about the project's roadmap, future development plans, and the possibility of contributions.

Some users reported their own experiences with Waydroid, sharing both positive and negative feedback. These real-world experiences provided valuable insights into the project's current state and potential issues. Some reported smooth operation and seamless integration, while others encountered bugs or performance problems.

A few comments centered on the legal and ethical implications of running proprietary Android apps within a Linux environment. This aspect raised questions about licensing agreements and potential conflicts with Google's terms of service.

Overall, the comments reflect a significant interest in Waydroid and its potential to bridge the gap between Linux desktops and Android apps. The discussion highlights both the excitement surrounding the project and the practical challenges that remain to be addressed.

Google Pixel 4a's old firmware is gone, trapping users on buggy battery update

permalink

Posted: 2025-01-29 14:59:59

Pixel 4a owners who haven't updated their phones are now stuck with a buggy December 2022 battery update as Google has removed older firmware versions from its servers. This means users can no longer downgrade to escape the battery drain and random shutdown issues introduced by the update. While Google has acknowledged the problem and promised a fix, there's no ETA, leaving affected users with no immediate solution. Essentially, Pixel 4a owners are forced to endure the battery problems until Google releases the corrected update.

Summary of Comments ( 156 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42865619

HN commenters generally express frustration and disappointment with Google's handling of the Pixel 4a battery issue. Several users report experiencing the battery drain problem after the update, with some claiming significantly reduced battery life. Some criticize Google's lack of communication and the removal of older firmware, making it impossible to revert to a working version. Others discuss potential workarounds, including custom ROMs like LineageOS, but acknowledge the risks and technical knowledge required. A few commenters mention the declining quality control of Pixel phones and question Google's commitment to supporting older devices. The overall sentiment is negative, with many expressing regret over purchasing a Pixel phone and a loss of trust in Google's hardware division.

The Hacker News comments section for the submitted Android Central article, "Google Pixel 4a's old firmware is gone, trapping users on the buggy battery update," contains a moderate number of comments discussing the situation. Several users express frustration and disappointment with Google's handling of the Pixel 4a battery issue.

A recurring theme is the lack of official acknowledgment or solution from Google. Commenters point out the silence from Google regarding the problem, despite widespread reports of significantly reduced battery life following the update. This lack of communication is seen as particularly concerning, leaving users feeling abandoned and unsure of whether a fix is forthcoming.

Some users share their personal experiences with the battery drain issue, corroborating the article's claims. They detail how their phone's battery life has drastically decreased, impacting their daily usage. One commenter mentions attempting various troubleshooting steps, including factory resets, but to no avail. This reinforces the severity of the issue and the lack of effective workarounds.

The unavailability of older firmware versions is a major point of contention. Commenters lament the inability to roll back to a previous, more stable firmware, effectively trapping them with the buggy update. This is contrasted with the practices of other manufacturers, like Apple, who often allow users to revert to older iOS versions if problems arise. The removal of older Pixel 4a firmware is viewed as a significant misstep by Google, limiting user options and exacerbating the battery issue.

Several commenters express broader concerns about the decreasing quality and support of Pixel phones. They perceive a trend of declining software quality and customer service, leading to disillusionment with the Pixel brand. Some mention considering switching to other Android manufacturers or even to iPhones due to these perceived shortcomings.

The overall sentiment in the comments section is one of negativity towards Google's handling of the Pixel 4a battery issue. Users express frustration with the lack of communication, the absence of a solution, and the inability to downgrade to older firmware. This experience appears to be eroding confidence in the Pixel brand for some users.

Using eSIMs with devices that only have a physical SIM slot via a 9eSIM SIM car

permalink

Posted: 2025-01-20 11:33:15

The article explores using a 9eSIM SIM card to enable eSIM functionality on devices with only physical SIM slots. The 9eSIM card acts as a bridge, allowing users to provision and switch between multiple eSIM profiles on their device through a companion app, effectively turning a physical SIM slot into an eSIM-capable one. The author details their experience setting up and using the 9eSIM with both Android and Linux, highlighting the benefits of managing multiple eSIM profiles without needing a physically dual-SIM device. While the process isn't entirely seamless, particularly on Linux, the 9eSIM offers a practical workaround for using eSIMs on older or incompatible hardware.

This blog post by Neil Hughes explores a workaround for utilizing the convenience of eSIM profiles on devices limited by having only a physical SIM card slot. The author details his experience with the 9eSIM SIM card, a physical SIM card that acts as an intermediary, allowing users to store and switch between multiple eSIM profiles on devices that lack native eSIM support. He meticulously outlines the process, focusing on Android and Linux environments.

Hughes begins by explaining the limitations of physical SIM cards and the advantages offered by eSIM technology, such as the ability to switch between carriers without physically swapping SIMs and the potential for streamlined device setup. He then introduces the 9eSIM card as a solution for bridging this gap, describing it as a physical SIM card that essentially emulates eSIM functionality.

The core of the blog post lies in the step-by-step instructions for configuring the 9eSIM card. This involves downloading and installing the required Android application, scanning a QR code provided by 9eSIM to link the physical card with the user account, and then adding eSIM profiles to the 9eSIM account through the app. Hughes thoroughly explains the process of selecting a desired eSIM profile from within the app, which is then subsequently communicated to the physical 9eSIM card, effectively activating that chosen profile on the device.

The author further extends the discussion by detailing his experience integrating the 9eSIM card with Linux. He provides specific command-line instructions for interacting with the 9eSIM card using tools like qmicli, enabling users to manage eSIM profiles directly from a Linux terminal. This portion of the post showcases a more technical approach, offering a deeper level of control for users comfortable with command-line interfaces.

Throughout the post, Hughes incorporates screenshots to visually guide the reader through the different stages of configuration, making the process easier to follow. He emphasizes the convenience of being able to manage multiple eSIM profiles from a single physical card, highlighting the potential cost savings from utilizing data plans from different carriers depending on location or specific needs. He concludes by reflecting on his overall positive experience with the 9eSIM card, presenting it as a valuable solution for individuals who wish to leverage the benefits of eSIM technology on devices restricted to physical SIM cards. He also notes that while he focused on Android and Linux, the 9eSIM card theoretically supports iOS devices as well, although he has not personally tested that functionality.

Summary of Comments ( 96 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42767584

Hacker News users discussed the practicality and security implications of using a 9eSIM to bridge the gap between eSIM-only services and devices with physical SIM slots. Some expressed concerns about the security of adding another layer into the communication chain, questioning the trustworthiness of the 9eSIM provider and the potential for vulnerabilities. Others were skeptical of the use case, pointing out that most devices support either physical SIM or eSIM, not both simultaneously, making the 9eSIM's functionality somewhat niche. The lack of open-source firmware for the 9eSIM also drew criticism, highlighting the difficulty in independently verifying its security. A few commenters saw potential in specific situations, such as using the 9eSIM as a backup or for managing multiple eSIM profiles on a single physical SIM device. Overall, the sentiment was cautiously curious, with many acknowledging the cleverness of the solution but remaining hesitant about its real-world security and usefulness.

The Hacker News post discussing the use of eSIMs with physical SIM slots via a 9eSIM card has generated several comments exploring various aspects of the technology and its potential implications.

One user expresses skepticism about the practicality of the solution, pointing out the added cost and complexity compared to simply using a standard physical SIM card. They question the target audience for such a product, suggesting that individuals who frequently switch between SIM profiles are more likely to already possess eSIM-compatible devices. This comment highlights the niche nature of the 9eSIM solution and challenges its value proposition.

Another commenter raises concerns about the security implications of using the 9eSIM, particularly regarding the potential for cloning or unauthorized access. They question the robustness of the security measures implemented by the 9eSIM and express a preference for the inherent security of a physical SIM card. This concern reflects a broader anxiety surrounding the security of digital SIM technologies compared to their physical counterparts.

A different perspective is offered by a user who sees the 9eSIM as a valuable tool for travelers, particularly those who require multiple SIM profiles for different regions or carriers. They highlight the convenience of switching between profiles without physically swapping SIM cards. This comment underscores a potential use case for the 9eSIM, catering to the needs of international travelers.

Further discussion revolves around the technical details of the 9eSIM's functionality, with one user inquiring about the specific method used to provision the eSIM profiles onto the card. This technical question demonstrates the curiosity surrounding the inner workings of the 9eSIM technology.

Finally, a commenter mentions the potential for using the 9eSIM as a backup solution in case of a lost or stolen phone. They suggest that the ability to quickly transfer a SIM profile to a different device could be a valuable feature. This comment expands the potential applications of the 9eSIM beyond its primary use case.

In summary, the comments on the Hacker News post reflect a mixed reception to the 9eSIM technology. While some users acknowledge its potential benefits for specific use cases like international travel or backup solutions, others express concerns about its cost, complexity, and security implications. The discussion also delves into the technical aspects of the technology, indicating a general interest in understanding its functionality.

Luck Be a Landlord Might Be Banned from Google Play

permalink

Posted: 2025-01-13 14:10:33

The popular mobile game Luck Be a Landlord faces potential removal from the Google Play Store due to its use of simulated gambling mechanics. Developer Trampoline Tales received a notice from Google citing a violation of their gambling policies, specifically the simulation of "casino-style games with real-world monetary value, even if there is no real-world monetary value awarded." While the game does not offer real-world prizes, its core gameplay revolves around slot machine-like mechanics and simulated betting. Trampoline Tales is appealing the decision, arguing the game is skill-based and comparable to other allowed strategy titles. The developer expressed concern over the subjective nature of the review process and the potential precedent this ban could set for other games with similar mechanics. They are currently working to comply with Google's request to remove the flagged content, though the specific changes required remain unclear.

The popular mobile game Luck Be a Landlord, a title that blends elements of slot machine mechanics with property management simulation, is facing the imminent threat of removal from the Google Play Store. This precarious situation has arisen due to the developer's staunch refusal to integrate changes demanded by Google pertaining to the game's depiction of simulated gambling. Google's policies, which aim to safeguard users from potential harm associated with gambling-like mechanics, specifically target the portrayal of simulated gambling as a path to financial gain. Luck Be a Landlord, with its core gameplay loop centered around spinning slots to acquire rent payments and upgrade properties, ostensibly falls within the purview of these regulations.

The developer, Dan, argues vehemently that Luck Be a Landlord is not, in fact, a gambling game. He contends that the game is fundamentally a strategy game, emphasizing the strategic choices players make regarding property acquisition and upgrades. While acknowledging the presence of randomized elements through the slot machine mechanic, he maintains that these elements are simply part of the game's overall design and do not constitute gambling in the traditional sense. Furthermore, he points out that the game does not offer real-world rewards or facilitate any form of monetary transactions related to the in-game mechanics, thereby further differentiating it from actual gambling.

Despite these arguments, Google appears resolute in its stance. The company has explicitly communicated to Dan that the game must be altered to comply with its policies, with suggested modifications including the removal of the slot machine visual metaphor or the introduction of alternative progression systems not reliant on simulated gambling mechanics. Dan, however, is resistant to these proposed changes, believing that they would fundamentally compromise the core gameplay loop and the very essence of Luck Be a Landlord. He perceives these demands as a form of censorship that stifles creative expression and undermines the artistic integrity of his game.

This impasse has created a tense standoff, with the ultimate fate of Luck Be a Landlord on the Google Play Store hanging in the balance. Dan faces a difficult choice: either acquiesce to Google's demands and potentially alter his game beyond recognition, or stand his ground on principle and risk the removal of his game from a major distribution platform, thereby significantly impacting its reach and accessibility to players. The situation highlights the ongoing tension between platform holders' content policies and developers' creative freedom, particularly in the increasingly complex landscape of mobile gaming.

Summary of Comments ( 122 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42683567

Hacker News users discuss the potential ban of the mobile game "Luck Be a Landlord" from Google Play due to its gambling-like mechanics. Several commenters expressed sympathy for the developer, highlighting the difficulty of navigating Google's seemingly arbitrary and opaque enforcement policies. Others debated whether the game constitutes actual gambling, with some arguing that its reliance on random number generation (RNG) mirrors many other accepted games. The core issue appears to be the ability to purchase in-game currency, which, combined with the RNG elements, blurs the line between skill-based gaming and gambling in the eyes of some commenters and potentially Google. A few users suggested potential workarounds for the developer, like removing in-app purchases or implementing alternative monetization strategies. The overall sentiment leans toward frustration with Google's inconsistent application of its rules and the precarious position this puts independent developers in.

The Hacker News comments section for the linked article discusses the potential removal of the game "Luck Be a Landlord" from the Google Play Store due to its inclusion of simulated gambling. The discussion revolves around the fairness and consistency of Google's enforcement policies, the nature of gambling in games, and the potential impact on the game's developer.

Several commenters express confusion and frustration with Google's seemingly arbitrary enforcement of its gambling policies. They point out other games on the platform that contain similar mechanics, such as loot boxes or gacha systems, and question why "Luck Be a Landlord" is being singled out. Some speculate about the specific criteria Google uses to determine what constitutes prohibited gambling and suggest that the game's explicit real-world money theme might be a contributing factor. Others argue that the core gameplay loop itself, revolving around random chance and resource management, doesn't necessarily equate to gambling.

A significant portion of the discussion focuses on the impact this ban could have on the game's developer. Commenters express sympathy for the solo developer, highlighting the potential financial and emotional toll of losing a significant distribution platform. The perceived lack of clear communication and support from Google is also criticized. Some suggest alternative distribution methods, such as itch.io or direct sales, and encourage the developer to appeal the decision.

A few commenters delve into the broader discussion surrounding the definition of gambling in games. They debate whether the presence of real-world currency themes, the ability to purchase in-game items, or the element of chance are sufficient to classify a game as gambling. Some argue that "Luck Be a Landlord" falls into a gray area, while others maintain that its core mechanics are distinct from traditional gambling activities.

The overall sentiment in the comments section leans towards support for the game developer and skepticism towards Google's enforcement policies. Many express concerns about the potential chilling effect this ban could have on independent game developers, particularly those experimenting with unconventional mechanics. The lack of transparency and seemingly arbitrary nature of the ban are recurring points of contention.

Stories with Tag Android

Summary of Comments ( 69 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43539103

Summary of Comments ( 14 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43485950

Summary of Comments ( 61 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484927

Summary of Comments ( 131 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43363031

Summary of Comments ( 15 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43361822

Summary of Comments ( 6 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43264957

Summary of Comments ( 22 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43253167

Summary of Comments ( 121 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43113397

Summary of Comments ( 90 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43053499

Summary of Comments ( 0 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42961562

Summary of Comments ( 12 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42911042

Summary of Comments ( 156 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42865619

Summary of Comments ( 96 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42767584

Summary of Comments ( 122 ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42683567

Summary of Comments ( 69 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43539103

Summary of Comments ( 14 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43485950

Summary of Comments ( 61 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43484927

Summary of Comments ( 131 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43363031

Summary of Comments ( 15 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43361822

Summary of Comments ( 6 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43264957

Summary of Comments ( 22 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43253167

Summary of Comments ( 121 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43113397

Summary of Comments ( 90 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43053499

Summary of Comments ( 0 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42961562

Summary of Comments ( 12 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42911042

Summary of Comments ( 156 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42865619

Summary of Comments ( 96 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42767584

Summary of Comments ( 122 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42683567