all 94 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 70 points 1 year ago (7 children)

With this and Google stopping side loading in Android, I’m going to be looking hard into Linux phones.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [+] -47 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Could the EFF or individuals sponsor apps from devs who refuse to identify to Big Goog?

    Dev sends EFF the source code,

    EFF registers with Google,

    EFF submits the app,

    Everybody’s happy except a number of people for obvious reasons but at least the app’s verified

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • That sounds like just changing who is verifying the developer. Whether it's the EFF (because they aren't going to put their name and reputation at risk for unreviewed source code) or google, the issue is the same.

    Someone has to be the middle man in deciding what is allowed to be installed.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    Sorry, you're well out of the loop on this one, boss. Sideloading has been common practice for thousands? millions? of users since the beginning of android. There are plenty of apps not listed on Google Play - the ones that come top mind are Fortnight for a time and now the Epic Games Store app, and some VPN apps that couldn't offer features like ad/malware blocking in their Play store versions. Sideloading means downloading an executable install file (an .APK file in this case) rather than installing from Google Play. And they are SEVERELY limiting this ability next year.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I don't think people got your point. I assume you meant that people aren't "sideloading" in android yet, because you just download an APK file and install it. Same as installing an EXE file in windows outside of the Microsoft Store is not called "sideloading" either.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 52 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Was there any reason to make this an ios app as opposed to a website hosted outside the US? I'm really not surprised by the removal. What did they expect? All the Tech CEOs came to the inauguration with bags of cash.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The only reason I can think of is the cost. Apple makes the map API free if you use Apple Maps on Apple devices. If you are building a website, you have to pay for Mapbox or Google Maps, etc., that can get pricey for indie developers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Isn’t Open Street Map free?

    But anyway, these apps are all about accessibility to regular folks. Believe it or not many people don’t know how to bookmark a website. Also this app gives you notifications, something a website could only do via email or something.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    Barrier to entry.

    Many (dare I say most) folks don’t know how to use a web browser, much less find a web app. Installing an App Store app is much easier.

    It’s also much lower visibility for those who do know.

    And that’s especially critical for this app, which relies on tons of people using it.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Building an iOS app is faster and simpler than building a web app. The developer also said he took advantage of some privacy features in the iOS development kit that made it easy to keep people anonymous.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 43 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Fuck the app just make it web based

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    And then Android could use it too, so many apps should just be websites.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Hasn't the developer been proven to be kind of a dick. Wasn't there some story a while ago about how they weren't really handling the data in the most secure method (Which given the subject matter is kind of the whole point).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    This is what sideloading is supposed to prevent

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 114 points 1 year ago (24 children)
  • [+] -126 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (24 children)
  • [–] 78 points 1 year ago (12 children)
  • [+] -58 points 1 year ago (12 children)
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Thats Apples and Oranges. Owning a phone is not like owning a a gun.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -41 points 1 year ago* (4 children)
  • [–] 44 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Except we aren't talking about the law. We are talking about corporations that sell you something and then retain control over it.

    You have no say in the process, you have no representation. These are not rules that we as a society have determined to be in the best interests of all of us. These are unilateral decisions placed upon us. You have no recourse if you disagree other than don't use the thing.

    Guns don't prevent you from doing anything. You still have the capability to do whatever you want with the thing. However, if you use it in a manner than harms someone else, in a way that we as a society have proposed, voted, and created laws prohibiting, then you deal with the consequences. But that is very different from having something in the gun that prevents it from taking ammo from another manufacturer. Or making it unable to shoot unless you pay a monthly fee.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -22 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago

    No. We weren't. This discussion was about phones and the software we are being allowed to install on them.

    The law does nothing to restrict us in that capacity. The restrictions are imposed by the manufacturer of the phone.

    You made the fallacious false equivalency of comparing that with guns and laws.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    Right, you can't break the law. Gun manufacturers are very explicitly not responsible if you break the law with one of the items they manufactured.

    This is more like the gun manufacturer coming back two years after you bought it and preventing you from using bullets from a vendor they don't approve of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    They can do whatever they want with them, that's why we have shootings.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] -18 points 1 year ago (4 children)
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    If they couldn't, then they wouldn't, but they obviously can, because they do. This is not complicated.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 1 year ago* (3 children)
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I feel like I am feeding a troll, but let me break this down:

    If you have a gun, you can point it at anything and pull the trigger, you don't need the permission of the manufacturer to do so.

    Not with a phone, you CAN'T load any software you want into your phone.

    That's the difference, you can do whatever you want with a gun, and if you mess up, you go to jail. You can't do whatever you want with your phone, only what the corp.s (apple) allow you to.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] 40 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (1 child)
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago*

    You're licking those corporate boots awfully hard for someone calling themselves Freedom advocate.

    You can certainly choose not to update it, but you just miss out on anything that requires those updates - like access to the Google play services.

    And that will do wonders for the security that Google claims is the reason behind this change, won't it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    "Ownership" totally does mean it's yours and you can do whatever you want with it.

    That means you can do it, not that you should, nor that what you do won't have consequences.

    It just means your phone won't stop you from downloading an unapproved app just like a gun won't stop you from loading an unapproved bullet.

    It means your gun has a safety mechanism you can unlock to shoot, as does your phone to download "unverified" apps.

    It means you can sell either freely to someone else without it becoming bricked or the new owner losing any rights (lookin' at you, Tesla cars).

    It means defaulting on the loan will require the physical reposession of your phone or gun, and that neither will magically lock you out of using it using telemetry.

    It means anyone with the right knowledge and tools can fix your phone and it'll work, just like your gun.

    It means your phone works for you, and not for someone else - just like your gun.

    Your phone is a tool. Just like your gun. It can be used for good - and for bad.

    What you do with it is up to you, and not up to it or its manufacturer.

    It means you can shoot people with your gun, just as you can extort and blackmail people with your phone. Nothing, other than your own morality, the morals of society and therule of law are preventing you from doing bad things. Certainly not the will of the manufacturer.

    Any forensic inquiry into a phone on a crime scene would be like that of a gun.

    Any taking of your phone from your home or person would require a warrant - like with a gun.

    Any inquiry into your phone's contents and qualities should require outside tools - like a similar inquiry into your gun.

    Your phone won't have a special police-only history of what you've used it for - like your gun.

    Your phone won't report what you've been doing with it to 3rd parties without your consent - like won't your gun.

    And so on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    But that's what it means. Or at least, it used to

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Truth post. You don't even have to enjoy the facts that you post. Lemmy is far too unhinged and emotional.

    If you state any fact they don't like, you are downvoted.

    I lovingly embrace any and all ironic downvotes I will get.

    Seeth with me ❤️

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 56 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    People are so stupid in this country. Do what the EU did and make it law that they have to offer sideloading and other app stores and payment methods.

    It should be the law to begin with. This walled garden shit is really just another word for controlling what the user does with the device they purchased and not allowing them to do business with anybody else exclusively to add software without apple's approval and protection racket fee.

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago

    Everything is about control. The internet was left open by accident for a while and they are working hard to "fix" it. They are just trying to be slightly less obvious about it than China was. All of the forced AI tools, required apps and stuff like that are just ways to move users away from the open web.

    Once most users restrict their Internet usage to ONLY content provided by the large companies (for example, once people no longer click on any Google result), then Internet providers will start granting access to the content from large companies for free and charge a lot more for access to anything else.

    In 10, maybe 20 years, we will be needing to tell our internet providers when we change jobs so that they may change which "custom" internet services we get to have access to specifically for work.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    It wouldn’t help.

    In this case, even if the app was side-loadable and had a web app, that’s enough of a technical hurdle to kill its critical mass.

    In other words, it doesn’t have to be banned; suppressing ICEBlock is basically enough to kill it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Arguably, if it was normal to sideload apps it wouldn't be as much of a barrier to users, but they've been conditionned to think they need an app and the only place you can ever get them is the store.

    It's a technical hurdle only because Apple decided they want to control everything, and same on Android because of Google's ever increasing war on sideloading. You used to download an APK from the browser and it would go like "This is an app! Install?", but now you have to go enable third party installation and all that, and now the whole Play Protect forcing developer validation coming up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago*

    You are overestimating how technical most folks are. I know kids and older adults, on either side of my age, that have no concept of a filesystem, a URL, an APK to download, things like that, because they've never needed any of that.

    Attention is finite.

    Hence, web app's aren't really blocked by iOS/Android, but that's still a basically insurmountable hurdle simply because it's not the usual procedure for operating a phone. Defaults and accessibility are king (and Apple/Google know it).

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    EU didn't do anything except lower the tax on developers from 30% to 27%. And they still require Apple's rubber stamp to install.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    Being constantly tracked is for the plebs, not the Elites or their enforcers.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    Rebrand it with the same tech as something like "Friend Sightings!" It's not a 1A violation because Apple banned it, it is a 1A violation because the government made them ban it.

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    It’s still on my phone! Sorry Tim Apple!

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Back in the aughts I was an apple fanboy. Later they no longer had the edge but I won't say it was completely not an option. Now it is completely not an option.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Just in case, if you're (still) a Nintendo, Sony, Tesla, Disney, Spotify, ... fan, it's not too late to change your mind about them too :)

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    Totally agree, but what to do? Just forsake all entertainment, media, and technology at this point?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    We all believed they cared about privacy back then, I just never got one because side loading is essencial for me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    honestly I never liked smartphones. it was mostly about the freebsd based os, large with lots of power and ports (this was the aughts), and the apple care was amazing. Once that went away it just made sense to save money but now its like they could be the cheap option and like no. ewww. linux was not as great at that point to.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    Do you own an iPhone? Oh, hey, you helped ICE.

    Yes, you did.

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    ICEBlock was really poorly designed from what I understand.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    For people downvoting the above, read some criticisms the app such as:

    https://micahflee.com/unfortunately-the-iceblock-app-is-activism-theater/

    I don’t know of the take-down legit but the security of the app has been questioned, too.

    Edit: The removal was bullshit. Apple should be pressured to put it back. But, the developer or someone else could do much better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›