Gaël Duval: The Path to a New Smartphone Ecosystem

2007 was a pivotal moment in our recent history: Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone, and the following year Google launched the first version of Android. From there, mobile ecosystems took over completely, driven by a data-extraction logic based on building commercial profiles and apps constantly fighting for attention on the screen. These changes happened so quickly –and were so profound– that societies around the world fully normalized practices that, if transplanted to other domains or forms of consumption, would be intolerable.

Part of what has been fueling debates around cognitive sovereignty comes from that shift. Because if mobile screens are constantly shaping our psyche, shouldn't we be thinking about ways to push back? If there has always been a counterculture in every area of life, why not propose a different way of living inside these mobile ecosystems?

The Birth of an Alternative

"We believe the current ecosystem of social media apps –driven by data exploitation and algorithmic curation– can be harmful. This is especially worrying for young users, who are still developing their judgment. hen algorithms shape their view of the world from an early age, the influence isn't only persuasive, but formative. The world doesn't need yet another tool that feeds human insecurity just to turn people into products. Our vision is for users to remain in control of their information and be empowered to step out of algorithm-defined echo chambers, so they can continue developing their own opinions and points of view."

That statement comes from Gaël Duval, a longtime free software developer widely known for creating the Mandrake Linux distribution –one of the first out-of-the-box distros, and very popular in Argentina in the early 2000s. Today, Duval is the CEO of /e/OS, a project developing a Google-free (or "degoogled") Android that still allows users to remain within the broader Android ecosystem.

"Around 2017, I realized that conventional smartphones had become deeply entangled with business models based on Big Tech surveillance. A smartphone should be just a tool to stay in touch with the people you love –not a tool that replaces them. I felt uncomfortable with data being collected and used without meaningful transparency or control. There wasn't a functional, easy-to-use mobile ecosystem built with privacy by design. That led to the creation of /e/OS: a mobile operating system that removes Google's tracking mechanisms. The goal is to combine digital sovereignty with usability, giving users back control over their data without sacrificing convenience", Duval writes in an email.

The difficulties around this issue come from many directions. On the one hand, there's a generalized sense of apathy: constant criticism, but little action or imagination about what to do next. On the other, there's what we've already mentioned –the open acceptance of a system dominated by tech oligarchs. "Many mainstream users don't understand (or underestimate) how serious digital surveillance is. Some even dismiss our concerns as paranoia when, in fact, the problem is very real. At the same time, people have more power than they think. That means educating ourselves about how these systems work, understanding what's at stake with our data, and sharing that knowledge with friends, family, and our communities. Education is the key to empowerment."

Just as feminism and other political and social movements have mobilized drastic changes quickly, something similar should happen here. Because these ecosystems operate globally, coordinating action is difficult –but not impossible. If Brazil could force Twitter to turn over data, and the EU could build legislation around digital data, why can't we imagine a world where tech oligarchs are restrained? "We need to pressure governments. It's not enough to talk about independence from tech giants while still relying on them for essential digital infrastructure. Real change means real investment in independent, privacy-focused alternatives", Duval says.

All Is Not Lost

When you try to talk about these topics with different people, it often seems –at first glance– that nobody cares. Worse: nobody can even picture a way out. The video published by Ofelia Fernández is clarifying, and because she has real reach, it pushes the topic into public discussion. The problem isn't the smartphone or technology itself, but the data-extraction-and-algorithms business model behind it. "Users are increasingly tired of manipulative algorithms. More and more people understand how they work and don't want that kind of manipulation. Big platforms still depend on attention and data extraction, but platforms like Mastodon or Bluesky show you can build networks without algorithms. And Mastodon's decentralized model even lets users choose –or host– their own servers. The question isn't if change will happen, but when."

Put that way, it may sound overly optimistic, but Duval has a point –and he has personal experience backing it up. When he launched Mandrake Linux, there was nothing as easy to install and as accessible for users who wanted to enter the Linux world. It became the gateway for thousands of people. Years later, many other distributions would arrive, replicating and improving the idea.

When we contribute to community-building in favor of sustainable, user-friendly technologies, the vision of improvement naturally becomes easier to hold onto. In a sense, part of our job is to keep pushing these debates forward and to show that it's possible to live outside a world of total surveillance, thought manipulation, and the slow destruction of the human psyche. It's not enough to stick to grand statements, cynical or apathetic critiques, and endless theory: we need concrete action –real-world organizing and sustained activism around these problems.

The Difficulties

The entire smartphone ecosystem is designed to be used almost exclusively through Google or iOS services: government apps, banking apps, prepaid health-insurance apps, and countless other examples. Even though a phone is a handheld computer, it's far from being a computer in the sense of giving users real control over the software they run.

"Ensuring mobile app compatibility with /e/OS can be challenging in a mobile ecosystem dominated by just two major operating system vendors. Their closed standards make it hard for other players in the OS space to achieve full interoperability. Still, more people now understand that having more ethical options outside the Big Tech duopoly is essential for a healthier digital future."

As of now, switching to another Android-based system like /e/OS is possible, since most essential apps work without issues. The main difficulty is the installation process, due to obstacles imposed by both phone manufacturers and software gatekeepers. But that's a matter of time: 25 years ago, installing Linux on a PC was an odyssey; today it's click, click, click. Something analogous will happen with smartphones.

This friction means that almost nobody even considers switching operating systems on their phone, which is one of the core problems. Android and iOS are built specifically to extract information; they're the backbone of digital extractivism, and no manufacturer –certainly not Google– wants users to swap in a more respectful system. "The average user is starting to question privacy, monopolistic practices, and the lack of choice. When people discover alternatives like /e/OS, Google risks losing its market dominance. In fact, Google's recent moves to restrict the Android Open Source Project aren't only about technical control –they're also about preserving dominance in a changing political and technological landscape."

The future

All these changes we've been living through for at least 15 years were studied and denounced by free software communities almost as soon as they began. Those of us who cared about privacy and data were the first to raise the alarm, but we never really escaped our niche of Linux nerds. Then the pandemic made one thing obvious: young people are completely burned out by the social media ecosystem. Add scandals like Cambridge Analytica, and you don't need much analysis to see that something is deeply broken –and that nobody seems to care.

But those of us who've been online long enough know that everything keeps shifting. The problem is clear: the attention economy is what makes the most money today, but in a few years it may become less profitable and go into decline. Until then, it remains a serious problem –and thinking through alternatives should be a social imperative.

"History shows that no technological empire lasts forever. In the next decade, I believe we'll see a fundamental shift toward openness and user sovereignty in mobile technology. This shift will be driven by a combination of political dynamics and growing global awareness. One paradoxical force in today's digital environment is that while misinformation can spread quickly, access to valuable and reliable information is also more common than ever. This change won't come from a single company or government, but from collective action. The mobile future is not predetermined; it's up to us to build it."