no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
30 comments in c/android@lemdro.id view that post
[–] 91 points 11 months ago* (2 children)

This isn't -bad- news, but I'm still not impressed. They could have just, you know, not done it in the first place. They don't get credit for partially walking back a bad decision. The "advanced flow" is more likely a dark pattern, and will still have a chilling effect on FOSS uptake and distribution, which is still the intended purpose of the change.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Still going to give Linux phones a shot now that the cats out of the bag.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 28 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Reminds me of manifest v3

    They just delayed it until people got bored being mad

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Building a new way does not adequately means giving up on developer verification. In the last paragraph, Google is also promoting the verification for non-GPlay developers.

    Out of all possibilities in this universe, there may be a chance that these new flows include user verification instead of developer.

    There should also be a rule to rephrase "sideloading" as "installing from non-Google-approved sources" at this point.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    As much as sideloading is a strange term, it is one that most people understand. If someone were to search for information about this specific topic, they would search for "sideloading", not whatever alternative we come up with, regardless of how "accurate" it is

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago*

    IIRC, the term predates Android, and was originally coined to refer to installing non-apple applications on the original iPhone. At the time, this could only be done via cable. So, as distinct from "downloading" from the app store to the device, it does make a certain kind of sense. It's been accepted into the vernacular with a slightly warped meaning, but that's language for you.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Based on this feedback and our ongoing conversations with the community, we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified. We are designing this flow specifically to resist coercion, ensuring that users aren't tricked into bypassing these safety checks while under pressure from a scammer. It will also include clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved, but ultimately, it puts the choice in their hands. We are gathering early feedback on the design of this feature now and will share more details in the coming months.

    Amazing, so basically what everyone said: Put all the big red scary warnings you want but don't make it impossible.
    Look how much pushback was needed to reach this obvious common sense solution. Truly incredible.
    Thanks for nothing Google 👍

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 28 points 11 months ago

    Sorry, I'm seeing someone else.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Couldn't handle the blowback, eh? I doubt this will convince the townsfolk to put down the pitchforks. Might need more walk back.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    too late. eat shit and go fuck yourself, Google.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    You say eat shit, like you think talking shit is a kind implication you're totally not-saying something of purpose and consequence.

    There is no difference between Algorithms and "Digital Mushrooms." They will eat the dead just as much as they eat the living.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)
  • [–] 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

    a fairphone with murena /e/os is looking pretty good right about now, or maybe whatever grapheneos is cooking up.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago*

    Have one (Fairphone with E/OS) and tbh, I really enjoy not dealing with googles shenanigans and straight up malware practices. I did not take kindly to one morning them telling me they removed a "dangerous" app. Mind you, it was a work phone and NFC debugging app from our own institute, costing my employer my lost time on it. Extra bonus for remotely installing and executing unwanted services that reduce battery life by 75%.

    With that level of interference, I wonder about the legal implications? "Someone torrented shrek from that phone?" Or even "Device was used as part of a malicious DDoS op?" Must've been some intern/intelligence agent at google, I don't control the device after all." seems like a legitimate defense/claim. Well, as long as the rule of law exists in some way. But if that goes away, then it doesn't matter really. At that point you need guns and combat drones, not phones.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    Mort and Baileys tactics

  • source
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago

    This will buy everybody more time to make/refine/try out normal non-google options, before they inevitably kill it permanently in a few years.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago (1 child)

    They are not easing up anything. They said there will be small scale testing still possible already. What we need is to say Yes, I want to enable Unknown sources install like we did until now.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 9 comments in c/hackernews@lemmy.bestiver.se view that post
    [–] 25 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

    Install not sideload.

    We heard from developers who were concerned about the barrier to entry when building apps intended only for a small group, like family or friends. We are using your input to shape a dedicated account type for students and hobbyists. This will allow you to distribute your creations to a limited number of devices without going through the full verification requirements.

    we are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified.

    Today, we’re excited to start inviting developers to the early access for developer verification in Android Developer Console for developers that distribute exclusively outside of Play.

    Does this mean F-Droid, IzzyOnDroid, Guardian Project, etc, are safe for now? The messaging is unclear.

    What about other android based OS like Graphene, etc? Will they be affected?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    Sounds like Google kinda sorta, almost, maybe, might get why users are upset that sideloaded apps need to be developer-verified. But at the same time, it seems they are still in a self-built echo chamber.

    Users need to keep putting pressure on Google to stop their nonsense.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    install not sideload. The word sideload needs to dissapear.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 11 months ago

    Its like the words racism or nigger or wetback. Racism is not a scientific term but one specifically designed for us the masses to say that someone called us a nigger or a wetback or somehow used our...here's another... "Race" to belittle us in some way. The word it self is a useless fucking word and we the victims must use it to describe the problem. Thereby, we the victims continued to legitimize something that doesn't exist "race". Race is not a scientific term, we simply think it is because otherwise why would people be offended if you call them niggers or wetbacks or chinky eyes? In scientific terms those insults are insults based on our appearance, the way we speak, our accent, our height, the color of our skin. Basically, our phenotype, our culture, our origin.

    Back to side loading. Side loading is not a computer science term. It simply means going around the app store. What we all need to do is keep insisting the truth, Side loading means "installing". Installing is made up too but at least it is an old understable universal word that clearly defines our intension. We have purchased a computer, now we would like to add a program to it so we want to "install" that program. There's no hack, piracy, criminal connotation, we simply what to do something perfectly legal to something we own legally and very often within our grasp at home or I'm privacy. Side loading is meant to create some kind of distrust to what we can all legally do to any other software we already own. What they would love is to drag us back to the main frame. Sure we own the phone, tablet or computer but they want to be sure it cannot do anything unless its something we pay them for thru their rental port.

    How about we switch this fucker around and coin the term "Rentalport" or "Rentapp", or "moneysucker". These are scientifically based words that mean the thing we do when we use their app. We are renting. Music, video, apps, we are renting and they don't want us to know or tell others that we are renting because we all know what renting is and what it feels like for housing. Its a huge negative feeling giving money away for nothing in return. Fucking Beyonce did not sing for me specially when I listen to her song for the millionth time. She probably doesn't even get my money so she can then be given a choice... Hmmm was this music distribution app doing good to my listeners and my pocket? OK here's 5% of my product, my song. No! These fuckers rent her song to us, we pay and they give a cent back to their employee for creating content for them to rent!

    Fuck blockbuster! It should have died with its physical form a long time ago never to return!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 11 months ago

    Oh, how gracious of them to allow device owners to exercise their property rights!

    Fuck those megalomaniacal technofeudalists sideways with a rusty iron rake. It shouldn't fucking matter what they want to "allow" because they shouldn't have the power to impose their will in the first place!

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    Too late. My next device is getting GrapheneOS

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    Google will allow people install what they want on their own phones.

    Gee nice

  • source
  • 5 comments in c/android@programming.dev view that post
    [–] 4 points 11 months ago

    So they're addressing students and private hobbyists, but not open source and hobbyists willing to publish.

    Sounds like it will be a kind of sideloading onto your own devices.

    that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified

    So for F-Droid, a vetting and curating publisher, users will have to go through this expert process. The announcement that activation under pressure will be prevented makes me thing of a time cooldown, like activate now, and it becomes active by tomorrow, 24 hours later.

    Scamming is a real problem, and to a degree, it may end up being a good thing. As long as Google does not take this opportunity to push hidden agenda of increasing accessibility and choice, to seize more control not for security but as market and platform strategy.

    F-Droid says they don't want to impersonate other projects in order to be able to publish their projects, arguably decreasing security, which is a valid concern. As long as there's a setting to allow this kind of sideloading and the use of F-Droid like before, I guess it is what it is, and may be acceptable.

    If only they had started from where they are now. It's plainly obvious there's these kinds of users and use-cases. Did they really need "the community feedback" to learn about everything outside of their primary "linear" users?

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago (2 children)

    We are building a new advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn't verified.

    Isn't this what we wanted?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 11 months ago (1 child)

    Impossible to say until we see it, but if they're willing to do this then why bother doing any of it? Scammers will easily walk the clueless through whatever steps Google sets up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago

    In my interpretation, the gains will be

    1. Google Store apps will have identities linked, making it harder to mass-produce and mass-publish scam apps
    2. Enabling app installs outside of the Google store will have an additional barrier to combat scammers interactive pressure, maybe a cooldown of 24 hours or something like that
  • source
  • parent