Slashdot Mirror
Android Also Comes With a Kill-Switch
Aviran writes "The search giant is retaining the right to delete applications from Android handsets on a whim.
Unlike Apple, the company has made no attempt to hide its intentions, and includes the details in the Android Market terms and conditions, as spotted by Computer World: 'Google may discover a product that violates the developer distribution agreement... in such an instance, Google retains the right to remotely remove those applications from your device at its sole discretion.'"
I was wondering about this... Is there confirmation that users will be able to (easily) load their own apps onto the phone? To the best of my knowledge, the HTC phone does not have a supporeted way of linking the phone to your PC.
If they delete an app you paid for, will they reimburse you?
To do something right, you often have to roll up your sleeves and get busy.
Sprint's the other US carrier that's a member of the "Open Handset Alliance" (the group behind Android devices, versus the platform) and they made it damned clear that no phone that allows people to place random applications would be allowed on THEIR network. Apparently that's hard to monetize.
So in order to placate Sprint, Google is requiring apps go through them and be remotely killable. But on the upside, it gets their devices onto a third carrier, as opposed to "just T-Mobile and AT&T." To the best of my knowledge, Verizon is still out.
...someone will be able to distribute a patch that disables the kill switch. If no such patch is possible or violates the purchase contract then the "phone" is not Open Source.
If such a patch is possible but results in termination of service the system is technically Opne Source but useless as such.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
I would expect most people to get angry at the carrier for not notifying them of abnormally high data usage.
If you produce a custom build, how will you sign the custom firmware image so that your phone runs it?
Or are you going to produce your own hardware to run it on as well?
Perhaps I'm confused, but I thought I read that even though the OS was open, the handset would only run firmware images that had been digitally signed by the handset maker. The OS is open so the handset makers can play with it - not the users.
IANAL, but this could well be subject to legal challenge in the UK under a combination of the Computer Misuse Act and the Unfair Contract Terms Act. The first piece of legislation means that you're not allowed to run code, modify data or attempt to access a computer that doesn't belong to you without the owner's permission; the second places restrictions on the type of clauses that companies can place in contracts with consumers. If Google deleted an application that I'd previously paid for, they'd be skating on some very thin leagal ice.
Honestly why anyone is surprised at Google acting like a real company is a mystery. Since Google became a publicly traded company they only have one obligation.....
Making stockholders a profit
Few companies set out to do bad deeds but most won't rule them out. Google was supposed to be different. Regarding "Don't be evil"(tm), CEO Eric Schmidt recently clarified the policy saying that it was simply meant as a conversation starter.
Here's Google from good to bad...
+7.1 - Philanthropy
Creating a foundation to fight poverty.
+5.3 - Coddling staff
Establishing on-site day care as an employee perk.
-2.4 - Moral Triage
Giving Brazilian police access to private photo albums on Orkut to assist an investigation into child pornography.The lesser of two evils is still pretty lame
-4.8 - Immaturity
Google's on going smear campaign against Privacy International for giving them a last place rank.
-6.7 - Screwing staff
Raising cost of on site day care to $57,000 per year.
-8.3 - Censorship
Instituting keyword filters at the request of the Chinese government. Google's do no evil policy only applies to the U.S.
Source: Wired 16.10
Ever heard of OpenMoko? It's pretty much a computer with a GSM modem, works on T-mobile with a SIM in US and all over Europe.
I bought a cellphone repeater to stick half on my roof and half in my house because of bad reception.
It would probably be trivially easy to open that thing up and disable the thing that makes it only broadcast it's available for handoffs if it can lock onto a tower. And then operate it without an antenna and, tada, it's a cell phone 'jammer', in that cell phones will switch to it and not actually be able to do anything. And then hook it up to a signal amplifier and blanket an area.
If cell phone networks were as fragile as some people think, there's no way in hell they'd let us have repeaters, which is literally a tiny tower.
If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
Frequency hopping and other tricks make simple jammers that cover any significant area very difficult to implement. Basically you either need heavy broadband noise in the microwave spectrum or an active malignant participant in the protocol.
If this is the kind of havoc you want to create, just go dent some waveguides on some cell towers.
Women are like electronics: you don't know how damaged they are until you try to turn them on.