So is anyone building such a smartphone?
And if not, why?
My guess is that it would cost too much, without the commodification of our private information. Just like the web.
And if not, why?
My guess is that it would cost too much, without the commodification of our private information. Just like the web.
>My guess is that it would cost too much, without the commodification of our private information.
[1] http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jun/22/uber-ftc-p...
If our smartphones worked like this, and we'd benefit more from better information, then we'd also have a pretty good reason to develop advanced information-centric UIs and focus a bit more on security and trust.
However, I am encouraged by the fact that people paid many thousands of dollars in the '80's and 90's to purchase PC's. They were much harder to use, much less powerful, and yet because these PC's represented either a competitive advantage or a novelty, the price was paid. No Internet, but a heckuva lot more control and trust than now.
If a similar value proposition pops up again, somehow de-commodifying or replacing the standard PC design (smartphone or otherwise), I suspect we'll see a similar willingness to pay a premium.
Perhaps a more appropriate question is not so much if anyone is building a smartphone (from a hardware definition) so much as is anyone building an operating system which runs on commonly available smartphone devices which does not employ these tactics?
> And if not, why?
I'm certain there are efforts in motion which seek to establish a viable choice for many smartphone owners in what their devices run.
As to "the commodification of our private information", well, I have to ask: why accept this in the first place?
The baseband is a huge security hole. The provider in large part owns the device, regardless of what software it's running.
> ... so much as is anyone building an operating system which runs on commonly available smartphone devices which does not employ these tactics?
I can live with Linux ;)
It will be possible to run with completely FLOSS software (including drivers) and it even solves the problem of the baseband modem having full control over the main CPU/memory.
Now if they accepted Bitcoins ...
But hey, I'll ask.
In the US at least, this is not the case:
https://www.fcc.gov/device-unlocking-faq
The cellular provider no more "owns the device" than the cable company "owns your TV."
> I can live with Linux ;)
But you are not living with Linux. You are living with Android ;-).
I'm not living with Android. I'm waiting for Linux.
Edit: I don't mean "own" literally, financially. I mean "own" in the sense of access and control. So yes, I can root "my" device, but I can't root the baseband radio.
http://kali4hackers.blogspot.com/2013/09/install-kali-linux-...
And yes, one can run Linux. But you're still running the Android kernel :(
If that couldn't crank up our creativity, nothing could.
I'm up for learning though :-).
Inputs would be the actions you take in life (choices you've made) and how they relate to your goals (which depend on actions). Output would be an interactive visualization of past actions. The purpose would be to help improve the quality of your choices (actions you take) to better achieve your goals. Algorithms would work with the accumulated information to pull out correlations, patterns, and in general accelerate the process.
No Internet required, and so much greater security, privacy, and trust than usual. Which is freeing in many ways.
Smartphones aren't going anywhere, but their value proposition is not the only one available. If we were to jump-start our creativity through tight constraints like the X-prize idea, I expect that we'd end up combining the best of our current technology with the best of the new. Or maybe the worst of both...