Ideally, a standard would be made for app distribution that everyone could align to so they don’t have to resort to something with the overhead of Flatpak. In terms of the numbers of apps… I don’t think anyone really needs ~3.5m to choose from. I need 1 decent task app, not the 10,000+ that are probably out there.
And WebOS. I know it’s still exists on LG TVs, but that shitty HP CEO killed it before it even had legs. What an idiot, he tried to shut down HP’s PC division too. He didn’t last a year in the role and WebOS was the biggest casualty. A lot of design elements from WebOS are now seen in modern phones, like the card based multitasking and swipe to close.
Ah, yeah, New Yorkers aren’t the easiest to follow. I got a chance to watch the full video. The main points, which you may have gotten, were that Purism didn’t honor refunds, and the security/privacy which they claim is very surface level and doesn’t stand up to any scrutiny.
Interesting… not long after I replied to this, I saw this post on Lemmy about Purism maybe not being so pure. I don’t have time to watch it all now, but figured I’d pass it along. Either way it’s it seems like the best Linux experience is using Ubuntu touch on an old Pixel 3a, still being tied to Google at least with the hardware, and it’s an old phone.
Yeah, I’ve watched some videos on a few different phones and different operating systems, but they all seem very early in development and more of hobby devices rather than anything someone can use as their daily driver. At the current rate it seems like it will be decades before it’s ready for prime time.
Major linux distributions get a lot of contributions from corporations that don’t compromise them to the whims of the company. The same model could be used. The companies contribute, because it ultimately benefits them, even if others can also benefit.
Fragmentation would likely be an issue, as we see with traditional Linux systems. However, systems like flatpak have helped standardize application distribution. Some of they fragmentation can also be seen as providing choice to users. As long as they all share the same protocols to talk to each other, which have been pretty well established by now, it shouldn’t be a huge issue.
Mobile operating systems aren’t winner take all like a political election. The existence of a 3rd party doesn’t hand a win to one side or the other. It could also help the incumbents avoid some anti-trust issues.
There needs to be a 3rd mobile platform that isn’t tied to Android. I really wish the Ubuntu phone took off, but Linux on mobile in general would be a really good thing… stock Debian or something. Then if an OEM wants to make their own distro to customize some things they can. I know this is done with Android today, but the ties to Google and the conflict of interest will also make that a weird relationship. I think the road for that will be very long without some corporate backing to fund full time developers for it.
Maybe the person doesn’t enjoy killing, but they realize that even passing the decision on is a choice and they are responsible for everyone on that track after they passed. And at some point, they will be added to that track as well. It then becomes a very primal question, are you willing to kill to save your own life?
This could also be setup in a way where no choice leads the train to automatically run down the doubling side, so when there are no people left to add, the entire human population is automatically wiped out.
I agree that the first person in line choosing to kill one is the right thing to do, as hard as it may be for them, they can take comfort in knowing they potentially saved millions of lives, as likely their own.