7 ms·

What happens if you "accidentally" become persona non grata with both Google and Apple? If you want to participate in the society, you will forever have to res

by devsda 3mo ago

What happens if you "accidentally" become persona non grata with both Google and Apple? If you want to participate in the society, you will forever have to resort to shady tactics. Shady can be defined something as arbitrary as using GrapheneOS. A temporary workaround like using alternatives like GrapheneOS for those affected will only delay the inevitable but it doesn't stop it at all.

pimeys 3mo ago
It's a great question to send to the DMA authorities: https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/contact-dma-team_en https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/contact-dma-team_en More of us ask this question, the better we are heard. Except if this is exactly what they want, then we need to vote better.
Imustaskforhelp 3mo ago
Over the long term, we definitely need something like Linux phones. I find it bizzarre by how little companies support this mission of Linux phones.
- echoangle 3mo ago
  I don’t want to be too pedantic but Android uses the Linux kernel. Degoogled Android is basically what you want.
  - eMPee584 3mo ago
    no, because screw all that java crap, they optimized for control and developer quantity, not for ux, customizability, performance...
- microtonal 3mo ago
  Why do you need a Linux phone (as if Android is not a Linux phone), when there is also AOSP. If Google closes it up, it can be forked, but I don't see any fundamental benefit of throwing away decades of development done on AOSP.
- birdsongs 3mo ago
  It's not Linux phones that we need. We already have alternatives, like graphene and other AOSP forks. We need corporations and governments to stop locking down and gatekeeping vital software to closed ecosystems. A Linux phone doesn't help me when my government's 2FA system (BankID) only runs on Android and IOS phones and can only be acquired with an app store account.
  - economistbob 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - vitally3643 3mo ago
      You read the terms wrong
      - deleted 3mo ago
        [deleted]
    - HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
      GrapheneOS does not run anything through google services. Nowhere in the "terms" is this stated. GrapheneOS uses first party servers for all default OS connections.
      - economistbob 3mo ago
        [flagged]
        grapheneos 3mo ago
        > Graphene proxies all the Google services connection. They take over the connections that would go to Google. They then, supposedly, only forward the ones you wish. GrapheneOS doesn't include Google Play services. Unlike LineageOS, GrapheneOS replaces all of the standard Android Open Source Project (AOSP) connections with our own servers. Also unlike LineageOS, GrapheneOS adds toggles for these connections providing a way to disable the ones which didn't already have a way to do it. See https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm for a comparison across AOSP-based operating systems covering what's done with most of the standard AOSP connections. It doesn't cover everything such as the Certificate Transparency (CT) log list downloads added in Android 16 which are now used by default for enforcing CT for apps targeting Android 17. > Graphene proxies what would go to Google on regular Android. GrapheneOS doesn't include Google Play services. It has a compatibility layer enabling running Google Mobile Services apps including Google Play services and Google Play Store as regular sandboxed apps, but it doesn't come with those. Users can choose to install those in specific profiles. > I am getting downvotes on this, but that is how their Google Play sandbox works. It is proxied on their server, not your phone. > > A non-Google copy of your Google pointed traffic is made. That is a fact. It is identifiable to you or they could not individually forward this or that. That is a fact. GrapheneOS doesn't include sandboxed Google Play. It does not come with it. It's possible to install those apps on GrapheneOS and it provides a compatibility layer to make it work. The compatibility layer doesn't involve proxying anything to our servers. > Extricating from Google is the answer. Not relating your RCS chats et al through a third party then to Google then to that third party and back to you. No such thing exists in GrapheneOS. It doesn't include any Google apps and doesn't proxy any of the connections made by Google apps elsewhere if people install them. GrapheneOS has low-level support for RCS but doesn't have an RCS app yet since the only one for Android which exists in practice anymore is Google Messages and Google apps aren't included in GrapheneOS. Google Messages can be installed by users on GrapheneOS and set as the SMS/MMS/RCS app instead of using our fork of AOSP Messaging but that's definitely not a default. We'll have our own RCS implementation in the future in our fork of AOSP MEssaging. > They wrote an article on it a while back. No, and it's definitely not how sandboxed Google Play works for people who choose to install it. It sounds like you're misunderstanding what our sandboxed Google Play compatibility layer handles location requests made to Play services. For users who install sandboxed Google Play on GrapheneOS, our compatibility layer redirects apps requesting location from Play services to request it from the OS instead. This doesn't involve making any connections, it happens locally on the default. By default, only GNSS (satellite-based location) with A-GNSS (SUPL and PSDS) is used. GNSS is a receive-only system. We add toggles for configuring SUPL and PSDS with choices between GrapheneOS, Google or Off. PSDS are static database downloads covering the whole world so that's just another form of update download. We also add a toggle for opting into our network-based location implementation which uses Apple's service either directly or via a proxy. You seem to be confusing our location request redirection with intercepting connections and running those through our services which isn't what it involves at all. Our location request redirection avoids needing to grant Location access to Play services by making it use the standard Android OS location service instead as many apps already do. There's a toggle for this in case someone actually wants to use Google's location service with their network-based location instead of Apple such as if the Apple data for their area is awful. > Graphene with Google Services is like calling up an Intel Agency and signing up to use them as your VPN. GrapheneOS doesn't include Google Mobile Services, and our sandboxed Google Play compatibility layer doesn't work that way at all. > Without Google Services, it is a way to degoogle a phone with an SD card slot and 3.5mm phone jack if Motorola continues on track, but I would prefer regular Lineage support than Graphene for that purpose in case the middle man aspect expands to non-Google Services apps later. There's no such man-in-the-middle system in GrapheneOS as you claim. LineageOS does not replace the Google servers for all of the standard AOSP services as we do and doesn't provide similar settings to control all of those. GrapheneOS does not intercept/redirect Google services used by Google apps as you claim. It doesn't come with Google apps as you're describing either. > I want straight no-google android with the chipset drivers so that calls and sms/mms messages work without Google getting a copy of every message sent and received, and I want it on phones with sd card slots and 3.5mm headphone ports. GrapheneOS only includes support for using SMS/MMS via the carrier. There's no involvement from Google unless Google is your carrier or your carrier is using GCP to host their servers or something similar. Using Google's RCS services would require that you go out of the way to install Google Messages after first going out of the way to install sandboxed Google Play followed by setting Google Messages as your carrier-based messaging app and granting the required permissions to use RCS (Phone permission for Google Messages and Play services along with the ICC authentication toggle in the sandboxed Google Play settings). You're talking about it as if us supporting installing these apps as regular sandboxed apps somehow makes that the default approach. That's not how any of this is supported at all. You have to go out of your way to install sandboxed Google Play or especially Google Messages. Those don't come with GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS does not include Google Mobile Services or Google Messages. It does not intercept or proxy connections made by Google apps installed by users. None of that is part of how it works.
dachris 3mo ago
If you've accidentally become a persona non grata, then obviously because you've not exercised sufficient self-censorship. This is real already. Recently saw a petition for EU to rein in big tech (there are several initiatives advocating this). Had this nagging voice at the back of my head ... what if signing that gets your Google Account terminated. I'll leave it open to you whether I signed it. For developers relying on any type of Google services, you'd be in for lots of pain.
- sixtyj 3mo ago
  Google had Don’t be evil motto just between 2000 and 2018. Other companies don’t even try to pretend it. You are owned by them. „Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.“ - Lord Acton, 1887
  - artisinal 3mo ago
    Like how Tony Chocolonely dropped their 100% slave free claim after finding out just how difficult that is to achieve. Nowadays they are using the slogan “Crazy about chocolates, serious about people”
    - unheardof 3mo ago
      [dead]
  - john_strinlai 3mo ago
    >Google had Don’t be evil motto just between 2000 and 2018. this is popping up a lot today for some reason. "don't be evil" is still in the code of conduct, as it always has been. it just isn't in the preface anymore after the restructuring under alphabet. https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of-conduct/default.aspx https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of... (its not like it stopped them, anyways)
- devsda 3mo ago
  It doesn't even have to be censorship of speech. If you are wrongly charged a significant amount by either Google or Apple and their service is of no help, what would you do? Most people would weigh the options, then just eat the cost than anger them with a chargeback and lose their email/phone access. That's self-censorship financially too. What if Google reinstates their old G+ and YouTube real name policy for its accounts. We would protest but give them the proof grudgingly and it can position itself as one of the core part of online ID verification push currently going on.
exe34 3mo ago
"If you had learned to wash lettuce, you wouldn't have had to pay court to Dionysius" - Diogenes.
artisinal 3mo ago
iOS can be used without an account. iPhones can be acquired outside of Apple. The EU has the alternative App Store option that doesn’t require an Apple account.
- pfortuny 3mo ago
  Wow, I did not know this and -despite its drawbacks, like not being able to install apps from the Apple App store- this seems like a great way to have a powerful dumb-phone.
  - malfist 3mo ago
    Why do you need a powerful dumb phone?
    - broken-kebab 3mo ago
      One can read it aloud in sarcastic tone, and it will become clear then.
- birdsongs 3mo ago
  But I can't use my Norwegian BankID unless I have an apple store or play store account. This is required for every aspect of society. Heathcare, banking, taxes, driving, using my debit card online. They removed SMS 2FA options recently, the only non-tech monopoly method is a 2fa codebrick that's getting harder and harder to acquire (there are new ridiculous facial ID and passport scanning requirements, run by a private corporation, in order to get one). It's garbage and getting worse. And it seems no one cares our entire lives exist at the whim of two US tech monoliths.
  - BetterThanSober 3mo ago
    That's on your bank and not necessarily because of Apple/Google duopoly. I think it is crazy to put the whole banking system on foreign, private company though
Grimblewald 3mo ago
At least we dont have a social credit system... hey wait a minute
shevy-java 3mo ago
You are right - now greedy corporations decide who is an "acceptable" human and who is perma-banned. Governments need to wake up to this insane level of Evil. And other governments also need the US government responsible here, since they allow this to happen. In objective terms this can be called a fascist system. > A temporary workaround like using alternatives like GrapheneOS The issue still is that so many services and functionalities are tied into private companies. States simply need to wake up now.
- DrewADesign 3mo ago
  > Governments need to wake up to this insane level of Evil. I’m not even being cynical — it would probably just increase the amount of government contract cash awarded to them. Control makes governing a lot easier, control is what tech companies have, and to varying degrees, it’s for sale.
- nanis 3mo ago
  > Governments need to wake up to this insane level of Evil Governments are made up of people. People who have at best median level understanding of the things they are ruling about but great self-interest in following the biggest purse to which they can attach themselves.
- broken-kebab 3mo ago
  As proven by history, it's convenient to have a big well-known external entity to blame as a source of any trouble, but in reality it's orders of magnitude easier to be a digital dissident in the US compared to the EU. And European Commission + European national governments are exactly the ones you should blame first. They are openly proud of how it works, they call it successful digitalization for a positive spin.
  - kmeisthax 3mo ago
    As an extra anecdote: one of the things Cory Doctorow has been bringing up as a counterweight to US tech hegemony has been repealing anticircumvention laws that the US insisted upon as a condition of tariff-free market access that has now been rescinded. This is a good idea, but at the same time, the EC is never going to do it. We're already seeing with Stop Killing Games how even tangentially related consumer protection issues can and will be shot down with an insistence that IP is sacred and untouchable. The reason for this is really simple: every pirate wants to be an admiral, and every client state wants to be an empire. We as tech consumers hear "sovereign cloud" and think "cutting out undue influence that US tech companies have in the EU". The EC hears "building our own tech monopolies to lock in other countries into our stack". Using SKG as an example again, the whole reason why SKG started was because of a French company, Ubisoft, killing one of their games. Why would the EC ever overrule their own industrial interests? The EC was specifically and expressly built to be an antidemocratic bulwark against popular sovereignty. The entire concept of dividing people up by nation-states is already an antidemocratic exercise - e.g. France has 69,000,000 residents and Malta has 520,000, but both get one seat at the EC. And because the EC is made up of nation-state appointees and not elected representatives, they have all the incentive in the world to stab their own people in the back. The EC is the designated villain that the """liberal""" side of Europe's government uses to shut down democratic control (and, sometimes, even liberalism itself). Some have pointed out that this is deliberate (and, supposedly, therefore good): that Malta would never have joined the EU if they didn't have veto powers over whatever France wanted to do. My counterargument is that veto powers are the last resort of the rich and powerful. You can either have strong protections[0] on national identity, or you can have democracy, but not both. [0] To be clear, the way we deal with democracy being a tyranny of the majority is with liberalism: we explicitly declare certain things to be "human rights" and thus more or less off limits to the democratic process. This list is generally fixed (or at least, difficult to change) and thus less ripe for abuse than, say, having an entire wing of the government dedicated solely to overruling the people that is active all the time.
llm_nerd 3mo ago
> What happens if you "accidentally" become persona non grata with both Google and Apple? https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/feb/18/international-criminal-court-icc-judges-trump-sanctions https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/feb/18/international-cr... The US made a Canadian judge a persona non grata for any firm domiciled in the US. All because she works for the ICC, and the ICC declared Netanyahu a war criminal (which is indisputible). Why is the US destroying worldwide trust in US businesses on behalf of a reviled nuclear armed hermit nation on the other side of the planet? Good question, but it is what it is. This example that the US will spuriously use sanctions like this is why many nations are investigating ways to purge American financial systems and tech.
- imglorp 3mo ago
  That judge may be an outlier today, but we all know tomorrow they could sweep through all accounts and ban everyone that spoke against the regime. We have arrived.
jerieljan 3mo ago
It's terrifying, yeah. To some degree, the closest we have to these situations besides getting flagged with TOS violations (whether real or false-flagged) in these companies are residents of countries that are either trade or economically sanctioned by the USA. Thankfully we haven't seen something like an account ban and deletion incident for such cases, but the severe ones I can remember usually prohibit access entirely and that'd be scary if it extended to primary services that others rely on for auth. You will be effectively locked out to services if it's all that's linked and that identity provider just decided you'd be persona non grata.
deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]
Limit5332 3mo ago
GrapheneOS is not shady at all, since when is wanting to use an actually secure OS that doesn't sell your data to palantir or some other ACTUALLY shady shit like that shady?
- empyrrhicist 3mo ago
  That was their point.

by devsda 3mo ago

pimeys 3mo ago

It's a great question to send to the DMA authorities: https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/contact-dma-team_en https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/contact-dma-team_en More of us ask this question, the better we are heard. Except if this is exactly what they want, then we need to vote better.

Imustaskforhelp 3mo ago

Over the long term, we definitely need something like Linux phones. I find it bizzarre by how little companies support this mission of Linux phones.

echoangle 3mo ago
I don’t want to be too pedantic but Android uses the Linux kernel. Degoogled Android is basically what you want.
- eMPee584 3mo ago
  no, because screw all that java crap, they optimized for control and developer quantity, not for ux, customizability, performance...
microtonal 3mo ago
Why do you need a Linux phone (as if Android is not a Linux phone), when there is also AOSP. If Google closes it up, it can be forked, but I don't see any fundamental benefit of throwing away decades of development done on AOSP.
birdsongs 3mo ago
It's not Linux phones that we need. We already have alternatives, like graphene and other AOSP forks. We need corporations and governments to stop locking down and gatekeeping vital software to closed ecosystems. A Linux phone doesn't help me when my government's 2FA system (BankID) only runs on Android and IOS phones and can only be acquired with an app store account.
- economistbob 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - vitally3643 3mo ago
    You read the terms wrong
    - deleted 3mo ago
      [deleted]
  - HybridStatAnim8 3mo ago
    GrapheneOS does not run anything through google services. Nowhere in the "terms" is this stated. GrapheneOS uses first party servers for all default OS connections.
    - economistbob 3mo ago
      [flagged]
      - grapheneos 3mo ago
        > Graphene proxies all the Google services connection. They take over the connections that would go to Google. They then, supposedly, only forward the ones you wish. GrapheneOS doesn't include Google Play services. Unlike LineageOS, GrapheneOS replaces all of the standard Android Open Source Project (AOSP) connections with our own servers. Also unlike LineageOS, GrapheneOS adds toggles for these connections providing a way to disable the ones which didn't already have a way to do it. See https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm for a comparison across AOSP-based operating systems covering what's done with most of the standard AOSP connections. It doesn't cover everything such as the Certificate Transparency (CT) log list downloads added in Android 16 which are now used by default for enforcing CT for apps targeting Android 17. > Graphene proxies what would go to Google on regular Android. GrapheneOS doesn't include Google Play services. It has a compatibility layer enabling running Google Mobile Services apps including Google Play services and Google Play Store as regular sandboxed apps, but it doesn't come with those. Users can choose to install those in specific profiles. > I am getting downvotes on this, but that is how their Google Play sandbox works. It is proxied on their server, not your phone. > > A non-Google copy of your Google pointed traffic is made. That is a fact. It is identifiable to you or they could not individually forward this or that. That is a fact. GrapheneOS doesn't include sandboxed Google Play. It does not come with it. It's possible to install those apps on GrapheneOS and it provides a compatibility layer to make it work. The compatibility layer doesn't involve proxying anything to our servers. > Extricating from Google is the answer. Not relating your RCS chats et al through a third party then to Google then to that third party and back to you. No such thing exists in GrapheneOS. It doesn't include any Google apps and doesn't proxy any of the connections made by Google apps elsewhere if people install them. GrapheneOS has low-level support for RCS but doesn't have an RCS app yet since the only one for Android which exists in practice anymore is Google Messages and Google apps aren't included in GrapheneOS. Google Messages can be installed by users on GrapheneOS and set as the SMS/MMS/RCS app instead of using our fork of AOSP Messaging but that's definitely not a default. We'll have our own RCS implementation in the future in our fork of AOSP MEssaging. > They wrote an article on it a while back. No, and it's definitely not how sandboxed Google Play works for people who choose to install it. It sounds like you're misunderstanding what our sandboxed Google Play compatibility layer handles location requests made to Play services. For users who install sandboxed Google Play on GrapheneOS, our compatibility layer redirects apps requesting location from Play services to request it from the OS instead. This doesn't involve making any connections, it happens locally on the default. By default, only GNSS (satellite-based location) with A-GNSS (SUPL and PSDS) is used. GNSS is a receive-only system. We add toggles for configuring SUPL and PSDS with choices between GrapheneOS, Google or Off. PSDS are static database downloads covering the whole world so that's just another form of update download. We also add a toggle for opting into our network-based location implementation which uses Apple's service either directly or via a proxy. You seem to be confusing our location request redirection with intercepting connections and running those through our services which isn't what it involves at all. Our location request redirection avoids needing to grant Location access to Play services by making it use the standard Android OS location service instead as many apps already do. There's a toggle for this in case someone actually wants to use Google's location service with their network-based location instead of Apple such as if the Apple data for their area is awful. > Graphene with Google Services is like calling up an Intel Agency and signing up to use them as your VPN. GrapheneOS doesn't include Google Mobile Services, and our sandboxed Google Play compatibility layer doesn't work that way at all. > Without Google Services, it is a way to degoogle a phone with an SD card slot and 3.5mm phone jack if Motorola continues on track, but I would prefer regular Lineage support than Graphene for that purpose in case the middle man aspect expands to non-Google Services apps later. There's no such man-in-the-middle system in GrapheneOS as you claim. LineageOS does not replace the Google servers for all of the standard AOSP services as we do and doesn't provide similar settings to control all of those. GrapheneOS does not intercept/redirect Google services used by Google apps as you claim. It doesn't come with Google apps as you're describing either. > I want straight no-google android with the chipset drivers so that calls and sms/mms messages work without Google getting a copy of every message sent and received, and I want it on phones with sd card slots and 3.5mm headphone ports. GrapheneOS only includes support for using SMS/MMS via the carrier. There's no involvement from Google unless Google is your carrier or your carrier is using GCP to host their servers or something similar. Using Google's RCS services would require that you go out of the way to install Google Messages after first going out of the way to install sandboxed Google Play followed by setting Google Messages as your carrier-based messaging app and granting the required permissions to use RCS (Phone permission for Google Messages and Play services along with the ICC authentication toggle in the sandboxed Google Play settings). You're talking about it as if us supporting installing these apps as regular sandboxed apps somehow makes that the default approach. That's not how any of this is supported at all. You have to go out of your way to install sandboxed Google Play or especially Google Messages. Those don't come with GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS does not include Google Mobile Services or Google Messages. It does not intercept or proxy connections made by Google apps installed by users. None of that is part of how it works.

dachris 3mo ago

If you've accidentally become a persona non grata, then obviously because you've not exercised sufficient self-censorship. This is real already. Recently saw a petition for EU to rein in big tech (there are several initiatives advocating this). Had this nagging voice at the back of my head ... what if signing that gets your Google Account terminated. I'll leave it open to you whether I signed it. For developers relying on any type of Google services, you'd be in for lots of pain.

sixtyj 3mo ago
Google had Don’t be evil motto just between 2000 and 2018. Other companies don’t even try to pretend it. You are owned by them. „Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.“ - Lord Acton, 1887
- artisinal 3mo ago
  Like how Tony Chocolonely dropped their 100% slave free claim after finding out just how difficult that is to achieve. Nowadays they are using the slogan “Crazy about chocolates, serious about people”
  - unheardof 3mo ago
    [dead]
- john_strinlai 3mo ago
  >Google had Don’t be evil motto just between 2000 and 2018. this is popping up a lot today for some reason. "don't be evil" is still in the code of conduct, as it always has been. it just isn't in the preface anymore after the restructuring under alphabet. https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of-conduct/default.aspx https://abc.xyz/investor/board-and-governance/google-code-of... (its not like it stopped them, anyways)
devsda 3mo ago
It doesn't even have to be censorship of speech. If you are wrongly charged a significant amount by either Google or Apple and their service is of no help, what would you do? Most people would weigh the options, then just eat the cost than anger them with a chargeback and lose their email/phone access. That's self-censorship financially too. What if Google reinstates their old G+ and YouTube real name policy for its accounts. We would protest but give them the proof grudgingly and it can position itself as one of the core part of online ID verification push currently going on.

exe34 3mo ago

"If you had learned to wash lettuce, you wouldn't have had to pay court to Dionysius" - Diogenes.

artisinal 3mo ago

iOS can be used without an account. iPhones can be acquired outside of Apple. The EU has the alternative App Store option that doesn’t require an Apple account.

pfortuny 3mo ago
Wow, I did not know this and -despite its drawbacks, like not being able to install apps from the Apple App store- this seems like a great way to have a powerful dumb-phone.
- malfist 3mo ago
  Why do you need a powerful dumb phone?
  - broken-kebab 3mo ago
    One can read it aloud in sarcastic tone, and it will become clear then.
birdsongs 3mo ago
But I can't use my Norwegian BankID unless I have an apple store or play store account. This is required for every aspect of society. Heathcare, banking, taxes, driving, using my debit card online. They removed SMS 2FA options recently, the only non-tech monopoly method is a 2fa codebrick that's getting harder and harder to acquire (there are new ridiculous facial ID and passport scanning requirements, run by a private corporation, in order to get one). It's garbage and getting worse. And it seems no one cares our entire lives exist at the whim of two US tech monoliths.
- BetterThanSober 3mo ago
  That's on your bank and not necessarily because of Apple/Google duopoly. I think it is crazy to put the whole banking system on foreign, private company though

Grimblewald 3mo ago

At least we dont have a social credit system... hey wait a minute

shevy-java 3mo ago

You are right - now greedy corporations decide who is an "acceptable" human and who is perma-banned. Governments need to wake up to this insane level of Evil. And other governments also need the US government responsible here, since they allow this to happen. In objective terms this can be called a fascist system. > A temporary workaround like using alternatives like GrapheneOS The issue still is that so many services and functionalities are tied into private companies. States simply need to wake up now.

DrewADesign 3mo ago
> Governments need to wake up to this insane level of Evil. I’m not even being cynical — it would probably just increase the amount of government contract cash awarded to them. Control makes governing a lot easier, control is what tech companies have, and to varying degrees, it’s for sale.
nanis 3mo ago
> Governments need to wake up to this insane level of Evil Governments are made up of people. People who have at best median level understanding of the things they are ruling about but great self-interest in following the biggest purse to which they can attach themselves.
broken-kebab 3mo ago
As proven by history, it's convenient to have a big well-known external entity to blame as a source of any trouble, but in reality it's orders of magnitude easier to be a digital dissident in the US compared to the EU. And European Commission + European national governments are exactly the ones you should blame first. They are openly proud of how it works, they call it successful digitalization for a positive spin.
- kmeisthax 3mo ago
  As an extra anecdote: one of the things Cory Doctorow has been bringing up as a counterweight to US tech hegemony has been repealing anticircumvention laws that the US insisted upon as a condition of tariff-free market access that has now been rescinded. This is a good idea, but at the same time, the EC is never going to do it. We're already seeing with Stop Killing Games how even tangentially related consumer protection issues can and will be shot down with an insistence that IP is sacred and untouchable. The reason for this is really simple: every pirate wants to be an admiral, and every client state wants to be an empire. We as tech consumers hear "sovereign cloud" and think "cutting out undue influence that US tech companies have in the EU". The EC hears "building our own tech monopolies to lock in other countries into our stack". Using SKG as an example again, the whole reason why SKG started was because of a French company, Ubisoft, killing one of their games. Why would the EC ever overrule their own industrial interests? The EC was specifically and expressly built to be an antidemocratic bulwark against popular sovereignty. The entire concept of dividing people up by nation-states is already an antidemocratic exercise - e.g. France has 69,000,000 residents and Malta has 520,000, but both get one seat at the EC. And because the EC is made up of nation-state appointees and not elected representatives, they have all the incentive in the world to stab their own people in the back. The EC is the designated villain that the """liberal""" side of Europe's government uses to shut down democratic control (and, sometimes, even liberalism itself). Some have pointed out that this is deliberate (and, supposedly, therefore good): that Malta would never have joined the EU if they didn't have veto powers over whatever France wanted to do. My counterargument is that veto powers are the last resort of the rich and powerful. You can either have strong protections[0] on national identity, or you can have democracy, but not both. [0] To be clear, the way we deal with democracy being a tyranny of the majority is with liberalism: we explicitly declare certain things to be "human rights" and thus more or less off limits to the democratic process. This list is generally fixed (or at least, difficult to change) and thus less ripe for abuse than, say, having an entire wing of the government dedicated solely to overruling the people that is active all the time.

llm_nerd 3mo ago

> What happens if you "accidentally" become persona non grata with both Google and Apple? https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/feb/18/international-criminal-court-icc-judges-trump-sanctions https://www.theguardian.com/law/2026/feb/18/international-cr... The US made a Canadian judge a persona non grata for any firm domiciled in the US. All because she works for the ICC, and the ICC declared Netanyahu a war criminal (which is indisputible). Why is the US destroying worldwide trust in US businesses on behalf of a reviled nuclear armed hermit nation on the other side of the planet? Good question, but it is what it is. This example that the US will spuriously use sanctions like this is why many nations are investigating ways to purge American financial systems and tech.

imglorp 3mo ago
That judge may be an outlier today, but we all know tomorrow they could sweep through all accounts and ban everyone that spoke against the regime. We have arrived.

jerieljan 3mo ago

It's terrifying, yeah. To some degree, the closest we have to these situations besides getting flagged with TOS violations (whether real or false-flagged) in these companies are residents of countries that are either trade or economically sanctioned by the USA. Thankfully we haven't seen something like an account ban and deletion incident for such cases, but the severe ones I can remember usually prohibit access entirely and that'd be scary if it extended to primary services that others rely on for auth. You will be effectively locked out to services if it's all that's linked and that identity provider just decided you'd be persona non grata.

deleted 3mo ago

[deleted]

Limit5332 3mo ago

GrapheneOS is not shady at all, since when is wanting to use an actually secure OS that doesn't sell your data to palantir or some other ACTUALLY shady shit like that shady?

empyrrhicist 3mo ago
That was their point.