top 97 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 168 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Oh? Are we giving them privacy?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 114 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    if they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Yeah, maybe it would be in our interests to make all government communications public access. If it isn't a matter happening outside our borders, have it open. Maybe a classification for certain discussions that requires they be released in a timely manner, and when reviewed by a 3rd party if any information is attempted to be hidden they are immediately removed from their position and an investigation starts as to whether the offense should be criminal.

    The timely manner would have to be monitored as in "we are going to performing a drug raid" they get a warrant that allocates them 2 days to have discussions pertaining to that topic, organize and execute it. Then release all communications immediately following. If they don't believe they can perform it in that time they need to submit it in their warrant request as to the reason why, time period, and date the information will be made public.

    If we wrote strict laws on it, the judges would be held accountable for giving out warrants brazenly, and the executive branch would be kept in check by such

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 126 points 1 year ago (31 children)

    Federated solutions which can't be stopped, self hosted, and available via Fdroid.

    Only real answer.

  • source
  • hideshow 31 child comments
  • [–] 92 points 1 year ago (29 children)

    Until Google revokes publishing privileges for side-loading applications. I think we'll have to go further and get used to making PWAs and regular websites.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 85 points 1 year ago (19 children)

    side-loading

    You mean "installing normally." "Sideloading" is fucking anti-property-rights loaded language.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    Do you have a better, simple word for what they're banning?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    installing?

    downloading and installing programs.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    But they're not banning downloading and installing programs. What are they blocking, specifically?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    regular installs of apps by unverified or suspended developers

    they can still be installed by

    whenever I point this out to the drama queens here, they get hissy

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (6 children)

    Yes. Just looking for a simple 1-3 word term that encapsulates this

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

    It's not a suggestion for an alternative. Sideloading is not even blocked: unblocked apps remain sideloadable. Sideloading is not "fucking anti-property-rights loaded language" & the word existed a while before Android OS.

    They're just being uninformed drama-queens as usual.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    It is a fairly loaded word, implying it's an alternative method of loading data to the primary, more actively vendor-supported method. Those methods you previously mentioned are actively subverting the primary application install methods (Google Play) and are 1 minor software update from being completely axed. Name-calling an opposing "they" is not quite productive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

    Name-calling an opposing “they”

    "They" is now a dirty word?

    Sideload wasn't loaded language before Android OS and still isn't: it's a bogus, overreactive claim.

    All of them are valid install methods. Developers will always need a way to load their experimental apps not yet suitable for release: they won't block the methods they need to do that.

    Clear use cases for casual users exist for

    • deterring them from installing software by bad actors that's known to be malicious
    • verifying non-malicious software hasn't been modified possibly maliciously before installing it.

    "They" are drama-queens, because despite legitimate use cases to address actual problems posing high-cost risks to users (even as Google turns out to be a shitty authority) & clear documentation that power users can still install any package they want, they choose to catastrophize.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    "They" is a pronoun. Hope that helps clear things up.

    Sideload wasn’t loaded language before Android OS and still isn’t: it’s a bogus, overreactive claim.

    The term "sideload" was coined by i-drive, a bunk dot-com contributor who applied to trademark the term because they were corporate ghouls. Their version of sideloading involved giving them a link to a file on the internet, and they would store it for you, so you didn't have to download it yourself. The idea behind sideloading is just transferring a fucking file. It's loaded language, despite whatever freedom or restrictions an implementation provides. Call it what it is, a file transfer.

    Clear use cases for casual users exist for

    What about the clear use case for a FOSS developer who doesn't want to go through the Google authority for validation? What happens when Google thinks an app is dangerous when it shows no clear malicious behavior? What happens when Google enforces the idea that blocking ads is malicious?

    (even as Google turns out to be a shitty authority)

    In my opinion, what a massive understatement.

    Edit: Put the documentation where your mouth is. Show me the "clear documentation that power users can still install any package they want," because F-Droid would like to have a word with you. While you're reading that, do take care to note that Google already has a service to protect against malicious applications. They don't need to limit application installs based on developer registration. They need to make a profit for their shareholders. They're corporate ghouls.

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

    “They” is a pronoun.

    Not the question.

    It’s loaded language

    Nothing you wrote supports that. In the i-drive case, it draws a distinction between a (1) direct transfer between remote systems (without intermediary) and (2) a transfer between a local & remote system.

    Other OSs have this concept. My first exposure to the concept came from administering Windows systems. Their definition draws an unopinionated distinction between official & unofficial distribution channels

    Sideloading apps is when you install apps that aren't from an official source, such as the Microsoft Store. Your organization can create its own apps, including line-of-business (LOB) apps.

    & their distinct installation methods with similar caveats

    When you enable sideloading, you allow installing and running apps from outside the Microsoft Store. This action might increase security risks to the device and your data. Sideloaded apps need to be signed with a certificate that the device trusts.

    That's the entire point of the term there: to express that the installation method & checks differ.

    What about the clear use case for a FOSS developer who doesn’t want to go through the Google authority for validation?

    Sign it yourself or bypass verification as stated before.

    Show me the “clear documentation that power users can still install any package they want,”

    It was linked above: try reading.

    Google already has a service to protect against malicious applications

    which is reactive & doesn't deter the installation of malicious apps via sideload like the new feature will.

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

    Hey man, just interested if you’d like to write more bootlicking prose about this: Google, with their Play Store, have previously let registered developers upload (and even lets end users download!) straight-up malware. Do any of these changes prevent registered developers from distributing malware on Google storefronts?

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

    I can't believe Steve Jobs was right all along.

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

    Steve Jobs just didn't have the right foresight. PWA's were a solution when the web was supposed to be the future of applications distribution. If he knew native apps were still the future and in app advertising and microtransactions were going to be where all was at, he would never have pushed PWA's. Steve was a salesman first and foremost

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

    He believed if he made quality products, that the stock price increases all the soulless capitalists demanded would follow. Which of course they did. Then Tim Apple took over, and quality went out the window in favor of stock buybacks. Kind of like Boeing.

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

    They can only do that to phones running gapps

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

    The issue with this is that like 95% of android devices run android with gapps and re-imaging your phone is becoming increasingly more difficult as manufacturers lock down their bootloaders. Normies who aren't technical are not gonna want to mess with that shit. I'm not saying this to instill hopelessness but highlighting that it's a challenge.

    For censorship circumvention, mainstream tech is gonna continue to be increasingly useless. We need to educate people about these matters and also try to encourage people to lean heavily into decentralised comms like lora/meshtastic

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 221 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 105 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Oh no, vulnerable 🥺 they need DEI? They need to be a protected class? 🥺

    Surveillance is suddenly wrong when it's the peasants surveiling wannabe samurai? 🥺

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Can I just be "that guy" and point out the CEO of Google is "Sundar Puchai"?

    Who do you think Trump is coming for, you fucking idiot? It's not guys like me named "David".

    I hate this. I hate that they are targeting "minorities", or Hispanics, or Indian folks... But many people in charge who are part of these groups don't even care. They think they are special. You're money doesn't make you immune, you complete goddamn waste of oxygen.

    We're trying to fucking help you. Stop condemning fellow human beings for the sake of profits. You are damning your children, and your family. You are selling them for gains. We hate you, and so do your children.

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

    Rich Brahman caste Indians, or similar believe they are the ones most similar to rich white people. At least if you looked into Indian caste system, they are notoriously conservative and probably racist too. Usha, is also part of it

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

    I think they're less "vulnerable" and more "fragile"

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 77 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The irony is so rich.

    To anyone that had doubts about governments putting restrictions on app stores, here is your proof. The level of power the current situation grants this duopoly is excessive and dangerous.

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

    I thought we had all the proof we needed when Tim Cook and Sundar Pichai were snuggling up to Trump at dinners and the inauguration

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

    google had been snuggling up to conservatives for a while, mostly around mid-pandemic, when they removed restrictions on not banning election denial, and then snowballed into right wing propaganda videos plaguing youtube ever since. they are part of the problem, even moreso than APPLE. and google recently made deals WITH ISRAEL to allow thier propaganda to fester the site.

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

    Calling masked, armed, armored thugs and terrorists with a disregard for the law a "vulnerable group" is a bit thick, isn't it?

  • source
  • [+] 69 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I mean... You only need the APK 👀

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 61 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    Was ever any doubt who corporate America would side with?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] 50 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    How was search and not the usual maps the hardest? The search is what I feel like most people switch first.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 47 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Google says a group of masked fascists kidnapping children from their beds is a "vulnerable group".

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 41 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    If you ever want to know why capitalism turns into fascism, look into how many companies willingly and knowingly did business with Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy.

    IBM made computers to help the Holocaust, because the Nazis could pay for the service of the machines to be built.

    Google is just a modern IBM.

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

    The Model M in my attic: heavy breathing

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Hey I'm also guilty, I have had a few thinkpads. All second hand, but I did love my T420.

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

    This is exactly why sideloading is very very important.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago
    [–] 30 points 1 year ago

    Ah yes... the guys with masks, guns, the backing of the president, and virtually unlimited federal government resources are a "vulnerable group"

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

    The agents who implement state violence are not a group. They're agents of the state.

    And now Google is directly collaborating with an oppressive autocratic regime.

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

    Curiously, while in character, it's about the stupidest thing companies can do, at least according to Mike Brock

    But yes, corporations are notoriously short-sighted when it comes to autocrats, even with a long history of ultimately getting their assets seized by the autocratic regimes they assisted into power.

    I'd like to think this all might be a time to teach common end-users the joys of FOSS and, if necessary, jailbreaking, but that's still a big ask for the general public even in the face of abduction and rendition.

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

    Heil Agent Orange 🍊🧡

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago
    [–] 26 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    "Why dont you stupid Americans organize or something?"

    They won't let us. We're trying.

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

    Don’t be evil.

  • source
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago

    Do not let Google escape this, ever. Cancel all payments to them. YouTube Premium, YouTube subscriptions, etc.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago

    Isn't ICE one of the biggest budget of the US now? How is that vulnerable?

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

    They're totally vulnerable! Just aim for the head!

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›
    11 comments in c/Technology@programming.dev view that post
    2 comments in c/usa@lemmy.ml view that post