Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Why is there no money to be made? I would at least pay to buy the hardware and possibly for ongoing software support as well (depending on how they structure such support or any other "soft" features). E.g. I think its a jolly good idea if somebody really checked for a living all those open source apps.

In any case if there is really no viable business model for private mainstream mobile computing we have been duped big time: This is not a consumer device, it is track-and-trace machinery.




In order to have a reasonable, stable supply chain at all, you need quite large scale; and even then your phone would have much smaller scale than the mainstream competitors and so would be be significantly more expensive than their models with similar hardware, both because it's targeting a niche and also because all this tracking&targeting does result in some revenue stream for the manufacturers.

It indeed is a jolly good idea if somebody really checked for a living all those open source apps, however the math works out only if you allocate the salary of those people over a million phones, not if you have only 10000 customers.

Perhaps you would actually be willing to pay a large premium for that, but the vast majority people are not. Perhaps a meaningful number of people would be willing to pay a small premium like 10-20%? But that's not what's reasonably achievable, the differences are much larger as soon as you go off mass market production or start needing software modifications which are a large fixed cost that is cost-effective only if you're distributing it over very many phones.

There have been many companies in the past which have found out the hard way that few people really care about privacy that much (or they care but can't really afford much, which has the same effect), but for a recent example, you can look at the troubles of Librem 5; IMHO it's trying to do similar things, but its price/performance is suffering because of that and you be the judge whether their business model looks viable. And if you want a trustworthy supply chain, then your (already high) costs literally double, again, Librem 5 "USA" model is an example of that - a $2k phone where the core functionality (excluding the privacy) is essentially the same or worse as a $200 phone from a Chinese brand.


you sketch a good frame to help think about this challenge holistically. the list of failed initiatives is by now so large it almost gives you a statistical sample of factors to take into account (I contributed a data point once - one of the <10K firefox-os/zte users :-(

but somehow the numbers could/should add up at some point. If you think (ballpark) a billion devices in circulation and assume that 1-in-1000 people has a combination of awareness and ability to afford a private / open source device, that is your 1M right there.

this should be a very conservative estimate. it assumes that people (more precisely those who claim to represent their best interests) will continue with the inexcusable practice of governments "not interfering" with the "market" (in quotes because it not a real market when you have two options). While some governments slowly take legislative steps in the data privacy space, I have never seen any actual warning from official lips about privacy (the way they warn about assuming financial risk, being overweight, drunk driving, not getting vaccinated etc).

maybe the current business model only stands due to the "subsidy through silence"?


> Why is there no money to be made?

Not enough people care to use cut rate hardware that actually conforms to the 'wholly open' philosophy. Even Stallman couldn't maintain using fully open hardware. He had to switch to a Thinkpad with Coreboot.

People have expectations when using devices as complex as a phone or laptop to where, compared to even a desktop with Linux, having a smartphone that is fully open comes with serious drawbacks.

You could always get a LibrePhone or a Pinephone but you probably won't enjoy the experience.


well, "fully open" is just an ideal. I think I could live with proprietary bits that are not involved in the private data trade.

it doesn't have to be "cut rate". I left the specs/price point open for that reason. But indeed thinking of it as a tool, not as a trend-following gadget with 12 cameras and the screen size of a laptop.

Just interested to see whether this approach is viable.


> Just interested to see whether this approach is viable.

Spoiler alert: It's not. The better SOCs end up becoming more proprietary because it's the companies' own implementations that make them perform better. That leads to proprietary drivers/software.


> Why is there no money to be made?

Because we don't really know how much hardware costs anymore. Most hardware you buy is subsidized in one way or another through data collection, from phones to TVs. Building stuff is very capital intensive, and the world changes very rapidly. And most people don't really care about data collection because they don't understand the consequences, or they don't care at all (which I find baffling). This means you'll be always facing cheaper competition. It's very hard to keep a company like that afloat.


this is plausible (and very worrisome if really true). We are not talking about an aspirational consumer device, it is already the case that you are being cutoff from regular life / the economy without one.

Incidentaly, I don't buy the "people don't care" argument. First of all, people do care. There is massive legislation in the EU (which represents half a billion people) towards data privacy. They are not freaks - well informed people obviously care about privacy. This touches also companies / commercial privacy and states (data sovereignty etc). But it is true that large numbers around the world are dazed and confused ("don't care") as nobody credible (and holding a large mouthpiece) is actually warning them.

But if you are right and its not viable (e.g why did blackberry not survive given companies at least should appreciate privacy) it is a baffling state to have degenerated into.


> I don't buy the "people don't care" argument.

A lot of very informed people do really sincerely not care. A coworker of mine (IT professional) literally told me that the fact that his phone is constantly tracking him and that he could show me his whereabouts during the last week/month on google maps was a feature.

A lot of people really, truly don’t care. Is as baffling to me as it is to you.


> it is already the case that you are being cutoff from regular life / the economy without one.

it's true that you can't easily buy stuff online while on the move, but _life_ is happening outside and without a phone.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: