Genuine question – do Android people get ads in their OS default camera, calculator, calendar, phone, file-manager or SMS messaging applications? Or do have these Fossify application some extra privacy features that do not come with the default ones?
The default phone and SMS messaging application on all Tier 1 Android OEMs is required to be Google Phone and Google Messages. Also as such, Google stopped maintaining AOSP Dialer and AOSP Messages.
You might want to check the permissions and such on the latest versions of those apps. Fossify is a fork of SimpleMobileTools but without the ads and trackers added by the new owners.
>Or do have these Fossify application some extra privacy features that do not come with the default ones?
It's this one. Google's built-in apps are closed source with undisclosed telemetry. Fossify are open source, and they don't send your contacts or calendar entries to Google. Google's apps also serve Google ecosystem lock-in, and Google's ecosystem serves ads.
The non-google options on the Play store give you the option of not sending telemetry to Google, but at the cost of typically violating privacy in other ways or including ads.
As far as I'm concerned, I run LineageOS, which doesn't come with everything I need OTOB, so I use app suites like Fossify, Simple Mobile Tools and other great work. Others may just want alternatives to pre-installed or standard apps that are more private and tuneable (eg. I maintained a fork of KDE Connect until they switched to Material 3 colors, and still do for VLC) because they're open source.
I stopped using the default apps when Google was forced by EU regulations to put a privacy policy popup in the stopwatch/alarm app because of course you need spyware in that.
No ads on the original apps, but these do have privacy benefits, they also just don't have useless features like the AI stuff that keeps getting crammed into default apps.
Everything Android seems to be increasingly enshittified these days.
I switched to Fossify gallery because I don't want my photos synced with google Photos anymore. When my default Messenger suddenly demanded access to my Google account, I looked for a replacement and all alternatives I could find on Google Play had ads, so again Fossify saved me. Love it so far.
I think many Apple users, especially people in the software industry, would prefer Apple software to be open source. It's not that they don't care, it's just that Apple quality is superior in multiple ways (hardware and software).
And it's not a coincidence that their software is closed. They can command ridiculously high margins and continue to invest in high quality products.
The default sms app showed me advertisements that seemed way too sophisticated for a medium like SMS or MMS. I had to disable a setting called "RCS Chat" to rid myself of that nonsense. I am pretty sure it isn't something that Google invented or something like that though so I'm not comfortable putting the blame squarely on them for it.
RCS is absolutely awful as it displays banner ads in your notifications. The notifications are far worse than what you get with SMS. It's the reason I turned off RCS as well.
So it is not a next generation editor at least yet? I personally do find this kind of marketing language off-putting – if the main promise is basically a false one, I immediately get suspicious of the whole product in general and dismiss it without even trying it out :/ I would rather read a honest "simple to use" even it is not that loud or unique. Note that this is not a critique on the product itself, just the landing page.
The difference with this technology are the unlimited possibilities to generate any type of video content with low knowledge barrier and relatively low investment required. The ethical issue is not about how this technology could disrupt the video job market, but how powerful content it can create literally on the fly. I mean, you can tell it's computer generated ... for now.
The statement "Not that you asked my opinion, but $23/year for screendimming software--its no wonder people crack this." does not make any sense. If this is an application that only dimms the screen (which you can do multiple ways without any application) why would anyone make an effort of creating and distributing it and why would anyone make an effort on searching for a cracked version of given application? Surely there is some added value to it.
Also "if you can detect that someone is cracking your software or doesn't have a valid license, put a donation link in the shape of a coffee cup in the corner of your software. At least people have the option to support you." I have no data to back this up, but I really doubt that the people that are money-limited or just don't want to pay 20$ for an application will suddenly support a developer voluntarily.
ah, see, you've applied logic where there is none. Am I really going to open a philosophical debate with myself when I visit a product's webpage? I scrolled through, I saw different scheduling types, some other features. But as a whole, the software's purpose is "make screen brighter or dimmer" and that's something I just don't have big use for.
And on your second point. I also don't have data. But if people crck software that costs $23, maybe they're willing to pay some fraction that isn't $23. Isn't that reasonable? Or in your mind, are there two groups of people: one that will pay anything, and the other that will pay nothing?
I assume you mean a film camera. But you can get a cheap digital camera (equal to a phone camera of a few years ago) for even cheaper. There isn't really a market for such low end cameras given nearly everyone has phones. But maybe as a toy for a small child too young for a phone or something.
That is how I learned the very basics of web audio and modular synthesizers at once (here's the result https://github.com/spectrome/patchcab). Setting a clear goal makes the learning much easier.
Is this targeted only to people knowledgable in chemistry and "nano stuff"?
I feel like I would be a target audience (games that do real world science and a greater good mixed with some cool looking hardware gadget, hell yeah) and I have children that would probably be interested in such thing.
But even after this extra explanation I don't understand what is the thing actually doing. What is the exact game mechanism? Do I only observe things; do I score better if I am fast or smart; what is the bio stuff in those things and how does it affect the games?
Could you maybe explain it like I'm five? Without using the words nano and molecular and bio and dna :)
Just imagine a door with a breeze blowing through it. You can feel the wind if you stand on one side. When stuff goes through the door it blocks the air going through the door. You can learn about stuff by putting it through such doors and seeing how much air different stuff blocks.
The Console at the link above lets you do nanotech, by playing games to put lots of tiny stuff through lots of tiny doors, and thus get big data about tiny stuff. With more data, the sensors can get smart enough to be useful for various applications, like detecting viruses or measuring your poo. Truly, we live in the future
My favorite "game" listed on the site is Poop of the Gods.
From what I understand, as one plays these games, the console's sensors will be analyzing actual samples of food, poop, microbes, viruses, pollutants, and other molecules..?
Thank you for the reply. Wow, so it is about playing with real molecules.
This is a fascinating and ambitious project that deserves a much bigger audience. I'm surprised this particular post didn't generate so much interest - it may have just slipped by; it seems like exactly the kind of creative technological application that HN users love.
I hope the PR/marketing efforts continue, with new articles, etc., so that more people get a chance to understand how cool it is.
I'm actually glad it hasn't gone viral--we needed to hear this feedback first. It would suck to have a million page views and most people baffled by it as they are now... We (a small incredibly persistent and talented team) are working on the iteration that makes the whole thing clear to an intelligent ten year old--the version that will be worth doing press for and getting a featured post about.
ATM we need to close our seed round so we're ready to actually ship and support a small alpha release. Regardless of how much attention we have or even capital, it'll only make sense to have a few hundred out there as we work out the kinks. But viral attention and a ton of people having to wait for the beta is fine as well, and if they see how much fun the alpha group is having in spite of the kinks--a lot of the play will be in a kind of "game show" format live, that you'll be able to watch and participate in even without a console--that'll have an impact, I think.
Message me if you're an angel investor or willing to share it with people who will get on the phone with me and can invest. Either way, hope to see you on the sign up list!
And thank you for "getting it". Yes, it's literally an advanced scientific instrument disguised as a toy, and it's our trojan horse for solving biology at population scale, bringing along "the masses" into the adventure in a way like nothing else quite has. We've chewed through mountains of concrete to bring this to where it is, and I want early investors to envision that this might literally be the most important project in the history of biotech... So I read your post with glowing warmth and happiness, and I needed that today!
What are some examples contrary to Bitcoin of human made things that are high in monetary value, but low on total (creation, distribution and maintenance) environmental impact?
This is a good point and I'm hard pressed to think of anything, but maybe concrete? It's actually very environmentally friendly, it just makes up like 30-50% of all things produced on earth so sums to a large CO2 footprint.
