Fairphone is on my radar as a repairabile alternative phone. And it’s available with /e/OS (optionally), a polished Google-free fork of Android, which doubly puts Fairphone on my radar.

Recently I watched an interview with the team at Fairphone. This phone got SEVEN years of software updates - Fairphone - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rePi1pjJcX0

Listening to Agnès Crepet, head of Software Engineering at Fairphone, she said something that caught my attention (emphasis mine):

We are also supporting… PostmarketOS… PostmarketOS is Linux-based. So this is not a fork of Android like /e/OS. And perhaps it’s not out of the box yet. We know that perhaps it’s not for my dad who can easily use /e/OS, for example. So it’s a bit more difficult, more for the tech savvy people. But we want to still nurturing (sic) those kinds of communities, because this is super important for the independence of the software.

I love to hear that postmarketOS is something the software engineering team of Fairphone is on their mind. And this quote is coming from someone who has the power to actually help. Software engineering support in this context probably means providing information about hardware drivers (and maybe the drivers themselves) so that postmarketOS can work well with the Fairphone hardware.

Crepet says supporting postmarketOS is important for the independence of the software. I may be reading too much into what she said, but I imagine that people focused on hardware longevity know that independent software will become necessary to keep their devices out of landfills. Fairphone beats the competition with long-term software support compared to other companies, but it’s still future garbage.

I notice that despite Fairphone’s supportive stance toward postmarketOS, we don’t see the fruit of that support today. Only the Fairphone 4 appears as a testing device for postmarketOS. What of the Fairphone 5 or 6? That probably speaks to how under-resourced the project is.

I get it. Shoehorning a general purpose operating system onto locked down devices with closed-source drivers is a difficult software problem. I’m a software developer myself and I know how difficult it is to maintain a software project, and I’m working on a much smaller scope.

Go look at how many devices on are the postmarketOS wiki. There are tons, but nearly all of them are impractical to use. The postmarketOS team is upfront about the work-in-progress state of things, but it still falls short of what I hope for.

I wring my hands a little over the lack of postmarketOS progress because of how badly we need it, or something like it. We’re at a point where even old electronics are quite capable. We have to stop throwing them away. And the corporations that made them won’t lift a finger to help.

When Amazon recently declared a couple generations of Kindle Fire Android tablets end of life, that would be the perfect time for an alternative operating system. I don’t have the figures, but Amazon has the retail traffic and self-promotional power to put Kindle Fire tablets among the most popular Android tablets in the United States. That’s just one example of a relatively popular device becoming garbage before it has to.

Somebody needs to put commercial money into postmarketOS if it’s going to solve a problem in my lifetime. Obviously the postmarket team doesn’t make their own phone, but maybe the Fairphone could be something like a “flagship” phone for postmarketOS. The presence of a flagship phone could attract other commercial interests who want an operating system without building their own or making a deal with Google. Fairphone is ideologically aligned partner, they just have to get there. It gives me something to dream about, anyway.

I’m still looking for valuable use-cases for LLMs. I’ve used them for low-stakes things such as a proof reader, a thesaurus1, some coding of bash scripts, HTML, and CSS (including for this website). But these are all things I can do myself. I trust the output of the LLM only because I have enough expertise and experience that I can verify the result. And if it gives me a bunch of crap, I can come up with a solution myself.

My concern is that if/when I do find a valuable use-case that the big players in LLMs will enshittify their products around that same time. I’m going into the “AI revolution” with open eyes. I know that if I get any value from it, the endgame is to extract that value (and more) back from me.

So I installed Ollama on my M1 MacBook Air.

I’ve been comparing prompts of Ollama using the model Qwen (qwen3.5:4b) to the free plan of ChatGPT. So far the answers come out mostly the same, which is really encouraging.

Free tools tend to lag behind the cutting edge consumer tools, but I’m pleasantly surprised that Ollama is so close to commercial offerings. Oh, I’m sure it’s substantially worse by some measure that matters to people who are close to this stuff, but that’s not me. I don’t rely on LLMs for anything, so if I have access to a model that’s like ChatGPT from 2-3 years ago, that’s good enough for now.

Next I’d like to try Open WebUI, which is a web front-end for Ollama that gives an interface like the usual LLM products. It seems to offer some additional features and just uses Ollama as infrastructure.

1: Using LLMs as a thesaurus is by far the best use-case I’ve found. It plays to the fundamental strengths of the software because they are models of language based on large samples of writing. I can ask for a word based on feeling, tone, connotation, etc. I can say I want a word that is like (or not like) another word. As a model of words and their relationship to other words, it makes a very good thesaurus. ↩