The Japan Fair Trade Commission has accused the U.S. tech giant of violating the country's anti-monopoly law by forcing manufacturers to preinstall its apps in smartphones.
Not going to do much. If they actually wanted changes and not fines, they’d do something truly novel like order the manufactures to use GrapheneOS or some other actual open source OS that doesn’t depend on financing provided by the app stores and ads.
Otherwise, you’re just making a show for the sake of showmanship, empty gestures.
This guy knows better than all of the professionals in the Japanese government, impressive. I mean he called out an OS that only runs on Google phones, but he’s figured it out guys!
Ah yes, because unless you’re on a government payroll, you’re clearly unqualified to point out superficial policymaking. Must be nice to believe that calling out performative regulation is the same as claiming omniscience.
GrapheneOS does primarily run on Pixel phones—because those are the only phones where the hardware allows verifiable, secure boot processes and full control over firmware. Samsung and most others lock down key components and make it impossible to truly sandbox or audit the system at the level GrapheneOS demands. That’s not a limitation of the OS—that’s a limitation of the closed, proprietary design of most Android OEMs.
Which, funnily enough, is exactly the problem.
The Japanese ruling is essentially: “Hey, stop forcing your apps, but keep the same Google-dependent infrastructure, monetization model, and walled-garden app stores.” It’s like demanding Coke remove the label from the bottle but still sell it in the same vending machines—still Coke, still their turf.
If they actually wanted to disrupt the monopoly, they’d be mandating real platform openness—allowing non-Google OS installs, pushing for hardware-level access standards, and ensuring devices don’t lock out third-party operating systems or app ecosystems.
But yeah, let’s all clap for another fine and pretend something changed.
Ah yes, because unless you’re on a government payroll, you’re clearly unqualified to point out superficial policymaking. Must be nice to believe that calling out performative regulation is the same as claiming omniscience.
Must be huh? The combination of assumptions and ignorance is awesome. I mean lets ignore that the people making these decisions went to school for these things. What is your educational background to be making these claims? Or do you just know things and learned on Google, so you know how a country should handle these things.
GrapheneOS does primarily run on Pixel phones—because those are the only phones where the hardware allows verifiable, secure boot processes and full control over firmware. Samsung and most others lock down key components and make it impossible to truly sandbox or audit the system at the level GrapheneOS demands. That’s not a limitation of the OS—that’s a limitation of the closed, proprietary design of most Android OEMs.
Cool story bro, still makes your suggestion a garbage one.
If they actually wanted to disrupt the monopoly, they’d be mandating real platform openness—allowing non-Google OS installs, pushing for hardware-level access standards, and ensuring devices don’t lock out third-party operating systems or app ecosystems.
Yah, Japan should be pushing to control the specifics of how a company based in another country. That’s the right move. This guy is big brain. Clearly.
But yeah, let’s all clap for another fine and pretend something changed.
No one is clapping about anything, they are just laughing at your nonsensical ranting.
Yah, Japan should be pushing to control the specifics of how a company based in another country. That’s the right move. This guy is big brain. Clearly.
So, your argument is Japan should be pushing to control the specifics of how app stores work against a company based in another country, because pushing specifics of how to control kernels on the same devices which actually enforces the closed ecosystems on a company based in another country isn’t the right move. Got it.
I never said what Japan should be doing. Never once, that’s you just auguring with yourself man lol. You don’t even need me, you can just make up stuff I say and get mad about it all by yourself.
It works on some Samsung devices. The entire reason it doesn’t work on more devices is because the manufacturers don’t release the kernel source. Or did you miss that in the docs?
Better question is, why would the courts not order the kernels to be open for open firmwares?
“Let’s order a for-profit company to eliminate their profit method, and ignore the actual problem” is a specialty of ignorant courts… And commenters.
So the courts, instead of addressing the real problem of phone makers only making hardware that for-profit partners can write software for, they just order the for-profit software makers to… remove the profit?
Because ordering someone to develop something is more complicated and nuanced than saying what they’re currently doing is unacceptable and they need to do something else. Courts are a reactive body. Legislature is who would need to push for open kernels/hardware/firmware.
Not going to do much. If they actually wanted changes and not fines, they’d do something truly novel like order the manufactures to use GrapheneOS or some other actual open source OS that doesn’t depend on financing provided by the app stores and ads.
Otherwise, you’re just making a show for the sake of showmanship, empty gestures.
This guy knows better than all of the professionals in the Japanese government, impressive. I mean he called out an OS that only runs on Google phones, but he’s figured it out guys!
Ah yes, because unless you’re on a government payroll, you’re clearly unqualified to point out superficial policymaking. Must be nice to believe that calling out performative regulation is the same as claiming omniscience.
GrapheneOS does primarily run on Pixel phones—because those are the only phones where the hardware allows verifiable, secure boot processes and full control over firmware. Samsung and most others lock down key components and make it impossible to truly sandbox or audit the system at the level GrapheneOS demands. That’s not a limitation of the OS—that’s a limitation of the closed, proprietary design of most Android OEMs.
Which, funnily enough, is exactly the problem.
The Japanese ruling is essentially: “Hey, stop forcing your apps, but keep the same Google-dependent infrastructure, monetization model, and walled-garden app stores.” It’s like demanding Coke remove the label from the bottle but still sell it in the same vending machines—still Coke, still their turf.
If they actually wanted to disrupt the monopoly, they’d be mandating real platform openness—allowing non-Google OS installs, pushing for hardware-level access standards, and ensuring devices don’t lock out third-party operating systems or app ecosystems.
But yeah, let’s all clap for another fine and pretend something changed.
Must be huh? The combination of assumptions and ignorance is awesome. I mean lets ignore that the people making these decisions went to school for these things. What is your educational background to be making these claims? Or do you just know things and learned on Google, so you know how a country should handle these things.
Cool story bro, still makes your suggestion a garbage one.
Yah, Japan should be pushing to control the specifics of how a company based in another country. That’s the right move. This guy is big brain. Clearly.
No one is clapping about anything, they are just laughing at your nonsensical ranting.
So, your argument is Japan should be pushing to control the specifics of how app stores work against a company based in another country, because pushing specifics of how to control kernels on the same devices which actually enforces the closed ecosystems on a company based in another country isn’t the right move. Got it.
Cognitive dissonance at its finest.
I never said what Japan should be doing. Never once, that’s you just auguring with yourself man lol. You don’t even need me, you can just make up stuff I say and get mad about it all by yourself.
The phone OS that only runs on Pixel devices. That’ll teach Google.
It works on some Samsung devices. The entire reason it doesn’t work on more devices is because the manufacturers don’t release the kernel source. Or did you miss that in the docs?
Better question is, why would the courts not order the kernels to be open for open firmwares?
“Let’s order a for-profit company to eliminate their profit method, and ignore the actual problem” is a specialty of ignorant courts… And commenters.
So the courts, instead of addressing the real problem of phone makers only making hardware that for-profit partners can write software for, they just order the for-profit software makers to… remove the profit?
The fuck kind of ass-backwards thinking is that?
The last supported Samsung device was the S4.
Because ordering someone to develop something is more complicated and nuanced than saying what they’re currently doing is unacceptable and they need to do something else. Courts are a reactive body. Legislature is who would need to push for open kernels/hardware/firmware.
And so we won’t fix the real problem and just react.
When watching the plumber work it’s unhelpful to complain that they aren’t fixing the electrical.
If you want to be part of a team attempting vast sweeping changes with no oversight or nuance maybe DOGE is still hiring.
Granted that’s not in Japan.
Removed by mod
Room Temperature IQ vibes