[advisedwang]

Seems like there's a few android equivalents:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.panshen.mo...

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.urbandroid...

And even one that claims to work with sound:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.samsung.a1...

EDIT: Actually there's an enormous number of apps like this, many released very recently with similar style etc. Weird.

[Pfhortune]

If you're like me and want an open or non-google-play alternative to these, this is available on F-Droid: https://f-droid.org/en/packages/dev.davidv.motionsickness/

I can't vouch for it (yet) but am going to give it a try!

[jlv2]

This one works well. Small, simple, no ads, open source.

[jerlam]

It's been rumored that Google would build it into Android for years:

https://www.androidauthority.com/google-motion-cues-pixels-n...

I've tried some of those Android equivalents and they seemed to work on any motion, not on acceleration like the Apple one.

[thejokeisonme]

That's physically impossible.

[usef-]

I think what he means is that the iPhone dots seem to move based on vehicle acceleration and deceleration, whereas the android ones use all phone motion.

If I move my iPhone around in my hands the dots don't move, but on my android they do (ie are simulating a stable horizon as the phone tilts, immediately). I don't know which is more effective. I thought the iPhone one was broken at first and didn't have the best results from it, I'm hoping the less-subtle android ones will work better for me.

Edit: I read from the docs that Apple's works best when facing forward, and I was often sitting sideways on a train

[lucb1e]

That's strange, any idea how it could be able to differentiate?

My only guess is some sort of processing, like wait and see if it follows the expected acceleration pattern (moderate initial acceleration from the unexpected-to-the-user car motion, followed by a stronger acceleration in the same direction as one's hands push the phone to keep it in the same visual place) but I'd assume such lag is precisely the issue VR etc. has and makes people extra sick. By the time you've counteracted it, your brain has clearly registered that the movement is disjointed from the visual input, so then it's too late for them dots to help right?! That couldn't possibly work (or could it). Very curious how this works. Like, surely it doesn't need to be connected to a compatible car?

Edit: wait, or the camera. That would be very battery-intensive (I guess theoretically it could turn on only 1% of 1 color channel on the sensor, but I'm not aware that this is a mode that the hardware/firmware supports), but when you move it yourself, then the camera would see motion in the opposite direction as when you're unexpectedly being moved such as in a car. Still seems unlikely

[twobitshifter]

It works in a plane, so it’s somehow able to detect the higher rate of speed, maybe by integrating, but I think it does use signals from CarPlay as well.

[jerlam]

Yeah, probably could have phrased that better.

They are using completely different approaches. Apple seems to be mostly using the accelerometer, to draw dots and visualize inertia. The Android apps are using the gyroscope, to draw a horizon.

[Cider9986]

I've found Kinestop to be much more effective and immediate than Apple's, highly recommend.

[sunaookami]

Same, +1 for KineStop.

[captainbland]

Tried the first one and it doesn't seem to work (dots don't respond to motion), and is absolutely riddled with intrusive ads. The one that another commenter left which is on F-droid is much better

[ramraj07]

Be careful with these apps. The permissions they ask for are quite expansive.

[sowbug]

You're correct, but there's a good reason: they need to draw over other apps to do what they do. So it's not necessarily nefarious. But it is an excellent reason to build the functionality into the OS.

(The reason the permission is so dangerous is they can trick you into pressing the wrong button by relabeling dangerous text with innocuous text.)

[advisedwang]

The presence of a good reason is exactly why you have to be so careful. Creating an app with a legitimate reason to request permission, only to also abuse it, is a great strategy for an attacker.

[Cider9986]

Absolutely, which is why I really appreciate the network permission on GrapheneOS. It makes me more comfortable to allow other permissions knowing no data can be exfiltrated.

[lucb1e]

Any self-respecting OS has packet filtering, this isn't unique to or surprising from GrapheneOS. On my Samsung/OneUI I use AFWall+ which sets iptables rules iirc

[Groxx]

It's wild to me that "internet access" is not revokable or even displayed in the Play Store in stock Android. It's such a huge security and privacy concern, even if most apps semi-legitimately need it.

Or, it would be wild, if it weren't fairly obvious that this is just Google protecting their mobile ad revenue.

[AndriyKunitsyn]

There's basically zero apps without some sort of analytics nowadays.

[lucb1e]

Not in all app repositories. This isn't so common among open source software as it is in the commercial/adware ones you find very prominently in Google's curated collection

[Groxx]

More than half of the ones I have installed have no internet access. Most because they don't have the permission (thanks, F-Droid!) and the rest because I've rejected that permission (thanks, GrapheneOS!)

[ncallaway]

That's fine. The OS should still let me turn off all outbound network connections for an app.

Apps that are solely relying on analytics still tend to function when the analytics are unreachable.

[subscribed]

Well, Google is the advertisement company.

[Dibby053]

>no data can be exfiltrated.

Well, that depends on the other apps you have installed. Unless things have changed in newer versions, apps with no networking can still do IPC, so any app can for example use Cronet to make network requests via Google Play Services, regardless of the toggle, as long as sandboxed Google Play Services has network permission.

[gf000]

Good point and thanks for the heads up.

Mostly asking it as a question, given that graphene runs Google play services (optionally) as a normal, sandboxed service with no special permissions might help a bit, but I guess unless you disable networking for every other service installed, this is sort of impossible to plug 100%? IPC can be quite the security hole.

[lucb1e]

Only if the other services provide a network proxy right? You'd need to find an exploit in the app otherwise.

Edit: although, I just remembered that it's actually as simple as sending "open this URL" intents to the Android equivalent of sensible-browser, which everyone will have installed. That does rely on users not understanding or caring about what's happening or it only works for the first user

[subscribed]

Yep, nothing has changed yet. GOS project still has this in the road map, but as of now Inter Profile Sharing still works.

[ignoramous]

> so any app can for example use Cronet to make network requests via Google Play Services

Cronet? Isn't that Chromium's networking library? How's that letting apps connect via Google Play Services?

[Cider9986]

Agreed.

[nopakos]

Network permissions could be used to avoid ads on Android. The horror!

[Cider9986]

And it even fails in the way that apps will see no-wifi and believe the entire device is offline. That way they can't detect it and mess around without harming regular offline users.