Here goes a minor rant after listening to the last few episodes of the IT-security podcast by @karlemilnikka
Writing this in English even though the podcast is in Swedish, as the issues are really not specific to Sweden.
1/?
Regarding the fact that Facebook and Google are shamelessly publishing blatant malware ads and refusing to take them down, @karlemilnikka asks "how is this possible?" as if it was super surprising.
The reason that is possible, which is not mentioned in the podcast, is that those companies are so big that they do not need to care. There is effectively no competition, no "market forces" that would matter to them.
2/?
Google and Facebook can do this kind of crap, and they can do much worse, without consequences. It is not surprising that they behave badly, it is to be expected. And we should expect even worse in the future, as their power increases even further.
3/?
Another thing that bothers me: how can you recommend Google Pixel phones?!?
The fact that Google has started expanding its influence to include hardware making is very dangerous.
They are moving towards having control of both the operating system and the hardware, like Apple.
Having separate hardware makers and software makers is good, because it leads to standards being used and it limits the power of any one individual company.
4/?
@karlemilnikka Have a look at a list of the top 10 largest companies in the world. You will find Google, Apple, Microsoft all in the top 5. They control the operating systems of nearly all devices people use today. Their power is a serious threat.
Now imagine Google and Apple merging into a single company. (if not officially merging they could anyway do that informally) Would you still recommend their products?
They are becoming like "E Corp" in the Mr. Robot tv series. Not good. No!
6/6
@eliasr @karlemilnikka The danger of Google being a popular mobile software and hardware producer, similar to Apple, is a connection I hadn't fully considered. I certainly agree this is dangerous, especially if Pixels eventually push out other popular hardware for Android, such as Samsung mobiles and tablets.
@5am @eliasr @karlemilnikka I've not had a Pixel and is not at all an expert. But as I understand, correct or not, Pixels are the most pure Google-Android phones; I mean eg Samsung has all the Google-things and in addition a lot of Samsung-things as well... It is also interesting that several de-Googled Android-based OS in some cases only runs on Pixel or almost alsways Pixels are among those that can be used. This written not in contradiction to your statements, only a reflection.
@hehemrin @eliasr @karlemilnikka Yes, I wish that GrapheneOS didn't require a Pixel phone! I'd certainly give it a try if I could run it on my Samsung.
We tried.
https://developer.sony.com/open-source/aosp-on-xperia-open-devices
/ex Sony who had some of the people working on AOSP on his budget
@eliasr I’m not recommending Pixel phones because they are made by Google. I’m recommending them because they are maintained longer than the competitors.
@karlemilnikka
Google becoming a hardware+software company like Apple is certainly good for Google's business, but it's bad news for those of us who want to have some kind of freedom.
The "Google Pixel" devices are part of that, and it's not good. The size and power of those companies is really dangerous.
5/?