- Are these phone processors really as compute-pet-watt efficient as a regular data center processor?
- There’s so little embodied carbon in a phone motherboard - and presumably some embodied carbon in whatever custom racking hardware up is being used to house these. Is that really compute-power-per-embodied-carbon-footprint efficient than making a new server?
Not sure if I should take this as a joke or a sign of an internal power struggle. If it's the former, there's still some catching up to do before you can match Samsung's "Upcycle", but you're on the right track.
I wonder how long this takes per phone. Presumably it could be a pretty fast shucking process if you don't care about any of the other components. I can't see it making much economic sense if it takes more than 1 minute/phone.
So people are to blame, not the companies shoveling ads, offering promotions to buy new phones, and in general creating the huge demand that they later, "are forced to satisfy".
I have no numbers to back up my argument, but smart phones are very power efficient by their nature are they not? I can play a 3d game, with impressive graphics, on a tiny device powered by a battery... With very little heat generated.
If your goal is to run LLM inference on a gpu in a power efficient manner, I bet a smart phone is a good place to start.
But yeah, these are great questions which are not obvious at all and should be answered when proposing such a system.
It’s a genuine shame how locked down iPhones are compared to even Android. Hypothetically you could run Linux inside UTM[0] but outside the EU Apple makes it intentionally difficult, and there’s still memory restrictions and performance penalties.
My group’s senior year project was a computing cluster on phones (specifically targetting LLM inference) [1]. Instead of installing a new OS we built separate apps per OS. Our devices were older, so the Android phones had worse hardware and the iPhones had more software restraints.
[0] https://getutm.app/ [1] https://github.com/orgs/rmcluster/repositories
I personally have lots of batch jobs like CFD simulations that could easily run on a fleet of phones with no real reliability issues, and I’d love to reuse old hardware and give it a second life. I’m already considering running old servers from e.g ETB but the cycles per watt on a phone are probably much better.
Does anyone have recommendations for novels, movies or video games with that topic?
You should not be connecting these old devices to an internet accessible network.
Google notably does well here with 7 years of support, but others such as Sony are 4 years, and Xiaomi on non-flagship devices are similar, or Samsung on their lowest budget models...
From my observations, phones get destroyed, used until the battery swells and breaks them, or handed down to kids or less careful users. No one I know has a bunch of old phones that are still useful but unused.
In general, you should look into the ‘solarpunk’ genre, especially post-apocalyptic solarpunk.
The article is pretty clear in the opening lines that this is a Google Research grant to the University of California, not even primarily done by Google employees.
I would think the main factor against such clusters is cost. Even if the four year old phones are free, they have to be dismantled, tested, and supporting hardware/software has to be developed. All of that would have to be done on an ongoing basis. While Google may have the volume to be able to build uniform clusters with a given generation of hardware, generations are measured in months. Using four year old hardware also trims four years off the expected life expectancy of the components, and that is comparing like to like (not consumer grade hardware to server grade hardware). I've got to wonder how all of that extra work affects the carbon-footprint they are trying to reduce. It would probably be more effective to increase the use life of the phone as a phone.
All of that is fine for a research project or, on smaller scales, hobby projects. It would be extraordinarily difficult to make it commercially viable.
The article seems to refer to a 2023 Pixel Fold as one of their candidates - I guess a good opportunity if those fragile screens get damaged but not a cheap used device otherwise.
Even normal slab pixel devices have limited support for true android replacements like PostmarketOS let alone cheaper 3rd party devices usually running Mediatek/Exnos SOC that have zero open docs or support.
So, OEM just have to let us unlock the bootloader, just let us unlock it after they stop selling it, and it would reduce so much waste.
They are just so greedy
caused by the very same Google...
This earlier comment referenced it :)
Yet I 100% agree on a generic computing device and they're not really that different in the end. Maybe that it needs to be unlockable after it has been on the market for 4 years or so (all units, no matter when they were sold, no matter if support ended)
Or maybe undercutting the competition like this to make it back later on games is not a profit model we should want? And that everything should just be unlockable insofar as it has X amount of memory, CPU power, capable of doing IP traffic... something like that. (Seems silly to require a firmware unlock on your toaster)
I think there should be a 20 year rule for all released commercial software to release the source code outside of national security concerns.
https://windupstories.com/books/pump-six-and-other-stories/
Also I guess Silo / WOOL by Hugh Howey is perhaps closer to what you wrote literally but probably not quite the vibe maybe.
???
You can still install alternate OSes (eg. grapheneos) on their latest phones.
>And now, they're making it illegal to install custom apps too: https://keepandroidopen.org/
Besides the questionable use of "illegal" (what are they going to do, send you to jail?), that's not even accurate. You can still install apps after a 24 hour wait, or no wait at all if you use adb.
But... if Google can do so if handed a random pile of old phones, then why would a consumer not be given the same option for their phones? If it works only for phones sold by Google once, same question holds. And applies to other vendors.
As you said: the "phone becomes useless just because OEM drops support" cycle needs to be broken. Well.. that and ability for end-users to replace batteries, screen, fix connectors etc.
Also it's unclear how data would move in & out of these old-phone-compute-nodes. USB-C? Article is a bit light on details there.
Approximately nobody is throwing away phones because the OEM stopped providing security patches. They're doing it for more practical reasons, like the phone getting slow, the battery wearing out, or wanting a better camera.
Moreover being able to replace firmware blobs/kernels/whatever doesn't mean such updates will actually materialize. For lineageos, many phones are stuck on 22.2 (android 15) because android 16 requires linux 5.4 and above, which means phones with earlier kernels are out of luck. Prior to this, there were phones from as early as 2016 (eg. the original Pixel) that could be upgraded to the latest Android. This isn't a "firmware blobs" or "locked down systems" problem. The kernel sources are available, and the kernel can be replaced, but nobody is going to bother upgrading the kernel for a 10 year old phone.
https://lineageos.org/Changelog-30/#legacy-devices
>You should not be connecting these old devices to an internet accessible network.
This depends on the use case. If you're using this as some sort of NAS or compute cluster running trusted workloads, you should be fine as long as there isn't some sort of RCE in the kernel.
Does anyone in the industry know why so much firmware is proprietary?
Couldn't Google somehow fix this? Since they control the substrate (Android) and they would be doing it for their convenience
[0] https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1jsJ5euZ4VXcwL4fbgJKM...
Sure it’s fair, and manufacturers could price accordingly. Legally enforceable is another story.
End users don’t need to replace screens, ports and batteries if there is reasonable cost parts and skilled labour available.
I’m happy with a trade off where a device has extreme miniaturisation and water resistance but needs someone with some surface mount soldering skill and the right tools to work on it.
Regardless, many (most?) phones hardware will last longer than the software running on it.
To be honest that has always had a smell to me akin to dumping.
This becomes a practical reason more quickly than you think. If a company only provides 4 years of security updates and they only provide 2 android MV releases, you quickly become out of date. I had a BlackBerry Key2 that I bought in 2018, I had to replace it in 2024 and I was really holding onto it despite a lot of practical problems - Slack dropped support for the version of Android a year earlier, it was only when I tried to install Google Wallet and could not that I finally decided despite the hardware and software functioning fine it really wasn't practical to use a device that was stuck on such an old version of Android. (I would've tried to figure out the kernel myself if the bootloader wasn't locked.)
It's also a huge pain in the ass for them to release software as open source. They would need to track all the different forks and modifications in an organized manner (they often do a lot of copy paste and one-off nonsense). They run pretty light staffing on a lot of these components and doing all of that is just another chore for their overworked devs.
Lastly, I've heard they sometimes use other commercial, closed-source software components which they can't easily relicense.
Is this all bullshit? Yes absolutely. I'm not defending them but these are the excuses they give.
They're actively working on closing the ecosystem even more (no more sideloading), DRM features, etc.
Maybe they'd do it for themselves, but they clearly don't want you, the customer, to do whatever you want with the device you bought and paid for.
I recycled them wheb carriers decided to block a bunch of phones.
Apple just shipped iOS 27, which has support for 2019's iPhone 11. So we are around 7 years there. It's probably fine for many people's use!
For a task like openclaw or hermes, or even something more aggressively graphical & GUI, it's not hard to imagine an 8 year old phone doing fine.
You factor in the expense of having your code releases escrowed by a third party (where part of the escrow contract itself is: "must be buildable from sources as provided"), and have a post-release pipeline that automatically uploads the new version. At the end of the term, the escrow holder releases all the versions.
This is a fairly common arrangement in high finance. If you want to supply services to a bank/insurer/etc. they will typically require an escrow arrangement as a contingency plan against you as a vendor going away. And yes, they pay the escrow costs.
Relative to ever rising hw requirements of apps they obviously get slower. That is why I personally buy new phones.
The carbon footprint of computing is a key sustainability challenge. It is driven by two major sources: operational carbon reflects emissions from energy consumed during use, and embodied carbon encompasses emissions associated with hardware manufacturing. While operational carbon is often addressed with efforts such as improved energy efficiency and using clean energy, the manufacturing footprint represents a more complex hurdle.
To address this, researchers at the University of California San Diego are building a pathway for the second life of phones through the exploration of “phone cluster computing.” This is a process whereby the motherboards of retired smartphones are extracted, collected into clusters, and redeployed as a general-purpose computing platform. With Google’s support, the university plans to deploy a datacenter built from 2,000 Pixel smartphones that will provide hundreds of researchers and students with low-cost, low-carbon cloud computing, reducing the need for newly-manufactured hardware and their associated emissions.
On average, people replace their phone every four years. This is generally driven by people’s desire for a new device, including for the functionalities provided by new models. Many replaced phones, however, have their core compute functionalities intact and are still relatively powerful computers with integrated processors, accelerators, memory, and storage. While an old phone might no longer be of interest to its first purchaser, putting it back in service can directly reduce the environmental footprint of computing by avoiding the need for further raw material extraction.
This blog discusses a novel strategy: re-deploying unwanted smartphones for cloud computing applications.
The single-threaded performance of modern smartphones’ performance processor cores is on-par with or better than those of modern multicore servers (see figure below). The most significant difference between a smartphone and a server is their size: servers contain dozens of powerful multithreaded processor cores and a huge memory capacity, while a smartphone has a handful of heterogeneous processor cores and 8-12GB of memory. One of the key challenges, then, is to target applications that fit into, or can be made to fit into, the capacity of a smartphone.
Redeploying unmodified consumer smartphones in a datacenter environment would be hazardous and inefficient. Smartphones’ compute elements are wrapped in components that aren’t needed in the server context — display, battery, chassis, and peripheral hardware like cameras. In addition to taking up valuable space, some components, such as batteries, contain materials not rated for a datacenter environment.
Prior to deployment, smartphones must be processed to remove all but the motherboard, which contains the core compute functionality. Note that the motherboard is responsible for the largest fraction of embodied carbon (approximately 50% based on internal carbon footprinting assessments), so this effort targets the most impactful components.
The Android operating system (OS) is already based on Linux, but the mobile-oriented Android userspace must be replaced with a general-purpose Linux distro. Updating the OS doesn't just get programmability; it also switches off many of the protections that are important for consumer devices, but unnecessary for cloud computing. For example, phones have a “low memory killer” daemon, which throttles memory-hungry applications.
The challenge of orchestrating jobs across the large number of devices that are needed to meet the performance of a traditional server — SPEC benchmarking results indicate that 25-50 phones equate to a modern server — is addressed by the use of containerized applications managed by Kubernetes. The phones are organized into self-managing clusters of 25-50 devices.
At many universities, an abundance of EdTech, grading, and research applications are already being run on the cloud. These applications range from tiny machines for hosting Jupyter notebooks to expensive GPU-based servers for parallel computing classes. The vast majority of these applications are within the capabilities of a single smartphone to host, with the standard grading backend running on small cloud instances such as AWS’ t3.micro (2 vCPU, 1 GB memory).
Researchers at the University of California San Diego are planning a 2,000-phone computing cluster to support computer science classes such as Parallel Computation and Systems Programming. Early experiments show that even a moderately-sized cluster of 20 phones is capable of supporting peak submission rates for a 75+ student class, with grading latencies below the default AWS backend. A 2,000 phone deployment will be capable of supporting a hundred such classes at once.
In addition to the direct benefit of providing 50 server-equivalents worth of compute at a fraction of the usual cost, the deployment will also act as a testbed for smartphone-based computing at scale. In particular, the project will investigate the reliability of consumer-grade hardware under sustained use. The full system is expected to launch in Fall 2026.
Read more about our approach to reducing carbon emissions associated with consumer electronics in our Consumer Hardware Carbon Reduction Guide.
This projected was supported by Googlers Efren Robles, Federico Centola, Nischal Agarwal, Rajiv Andrade, Manoj Vishwanathan, Ron Vered, Behnam Heydarshahi, Karina Repetz, Ted Briggs, Julie Rapoport, David Bourne, and Tom Kennedy. UC San Diego collaborators include Aramesh Ranganathan, Chris Crutchfield, Gabriel Marcano, Computer Science Prof. Ryan Kastner, and Computer Science Prof. Patrick Pannuto.