remember when people were actually excited about new android releases because they were weird and consumer friendly?
Perfect time for the Chinese to setup a shell company in Mexico that sells smartphones & devices with AOSP-android-based OS to the US. It’ll sell like hot cakes.
It’ll sell like hot cakes.
Nope… lot of apps won’t run.
Nobody is buying a phone without Google Play Certification.
Not to mention, some carriers like ATT have a weird whitelist thing.
Also, there might be compatibility issues with provisioning the SIM, since I just had an issue with LineageOS breaking data connection, but restoring factory rom fixes it, then I flash Lineage again and it broke again, so yeah… I expect similar issues with a “Non- Google Play Certified” device.
Biggest thing is: Netflix Widewine defaults back to L3 instead of L1 requited for HD stuff
Before you say “just pirate”, most people don’t know how to do that. Also somethings can’t even get pirated since its so niche.
Weird that they want to do all the verification themselves and not just allow certificate signing using verified CAs. Oh well it’s not weird because we all know Google does this to fight back against third party stores and to get developers back to their shitty one and of course to better track them.
I’m guessing what you’re suggesting is that Google’s proposal is the same as requiring all packages be signed and accompanied by an Extended Validation or Oragnisation Validation X.509 certificate.
While that would technically work, the problem with using the existing PKI is that it’s still very expensive to get EV/OV certificates. And the most common of these certs (those for TLS purposes) will soon only last 47 days which is, to put it mildly, would be a pain in the ass to use for package-signing.
My project uses a free one from SignPath. They offer this for opensource projects and require a verifiable GitHub build process. It’s not EV certs but it’s good enough and free.
edit: this is an article from November, its not something new…
bullshit! if this is actually what the “new” rule is, the exact same thing was already part of their unacceptable original plans.
To accommodate educational and noncommercial development, Google will introduce a new limited developer account type aimed at students and hobbyists. These accounts will not undergo full identity verification but will instead allow app installations on a restricted number of registered devices.
no to any kind of accounts, to any kind of developer registration, and any kind of install limits! its none of google’s business what apps people install outside their store, and so they shouldn’t be able to enforce a global installation limit for any apps!
I fucking hate that word. It’s not ‘sideloading’ to install on my own device what I want to install, to use the apps I want to use; to not use the apps I don’t want to use. I am not ‘sideloading’ anything when I install programs on my PC. No different on my phone.
Fuck off with all these new bullshit terms that are only used to imply that what we’re doing (with our own devices) is somehow outside the norm, to justify the constant enshittifcation and the growing stranglehold these corporations want on our lives. It’s infuriating.
@wide_eyed_stupid @Gsus4 “You will own nothing, and if you don’t like it you can talk to the security cyberdog that has you in its sights.”
It’s not a “bullshit new term”, it’s three decades old and means transferring files locally from one device to another, instead of directly downloading or uploading from/to an external server.
The origin goes back to MP3.com and i-drive in late 90’s, but the most common sideloading people did was downloading music to their PC using services like iTunes, and transferring them to their mp3 players. As they did often with early PDA and smartphone apps, where the term for Android comes from - get the .apk on your computer, transfer it to your phone, and install it.
Sideloading.Fair, it’s not a new term. I was born in the 80’ies, I’m familiar with the concept.
However, it’s now being used with new bullshit meaning (i.e. going outside the Google/Apple app and their own offered selection), and media are normalizing this use.
so you’re saying it is the wrong word, because most apks are downloaded from the internet on-device. That is not a local transfer
It is still the same installation method, directly installing the .apk file, from way back when the term for Android usage was defined. So, kinda, but also kinda not. Also, if you do use ADB to do the install from a PC, the command is “ADB sideload filename” which will do the transfer and installation to the memory directly. Then it truly is sideloading as defined.
Android doesn’t use ROMs (Read-only Memory) any more either, because the filesystems are now writable. But Lineage etc are still called custom ROMs, because the end result hasn’t changed.
Okay, but Google uses it in a way where directly going to the server they host F-Droid.apk, downloading and installing it counts as sideloading.
If anything, using Google Play is sideloading by that definition, since I can’t just download a release from the originators’ server, they need to first transfer it into a secondary location, Google’s servers, and I can only install it from there.
@JohnEdwa @wide_eyed_stupid indeed. but it takes only a single incendiarily indignant but factually wrong mastodon post to force anyone left who’s still reading wikipedia to clarify forever, because the OP is being parroted until hell freezes over.
@JohnEdwa @wide_eyed_stupid the correct take would be “i should be free to sideload software to my devices in any way i please”.
@lritter @JohnEdwa @wide_eyed_stupid unfortunately the term has been anti-reclaimed by corpos for use to imply it’s outside the norm to have control over what runs on your own device
@zaire @wide_eyed_stupid @JohnEdwa it’s our term. just like the sparkles emoji. they can’t claim anything. it’s all ours. they can go to hell.
@wide_eyed_stupid @Gsus4
They’re “sideloading” our vocabularyI’m sure there’s something in the EULA about how it’s actually their device and we are just licensing it, just like software. I hate this tech feudalism so much.
You know, it’s very possible, because I’ve never actually read an entire EULA, I don’t think.
@wide_eyed_stupid @arararagi I will never read the TOS and if it says I can’t use the machine I own as I see fit, they can shove the EULA and the DMCA it rode in on up their ass sideways.
“I have read and agree to the Terms” is the biggest lie on the web. Together, we can fix that.
Meanwhile the Play Store is full of scams. This isn’t about safety, it making sure they get a cut from the scam apps.
It’s a trashpile. If I need an app, I search ‘site:reddit android app x’ or look in f-droid
Cool story, goog.
I’m just going to keep waiting for a linux/foss phone so that its features and capabilities are actually predictable year to year.
But maybe I’m just too picky about what features and capabilities I want. I admit I’ve gotten used to some pretty outlandish stuff like… lemme check my notes here… “the device does the things I tell it to do.” Real galaxy-brain shit!
There is already postmarketOS if you have an old supported phone somewhere in the drawer… it has still some rough edges, but it works and gives a nice glimpse into that ecosystem.
Not trying to be pessimistic: But Good luck with the linux phone when carriers start doing whitelisting like ATT already does
(Unless you wanna dual-phone?)
For carriers like AT&T, texting & other data are important. Dumb phones won’t provide them the data needed. They will absolutely support Linux phones.
The company says it is now developing an “advanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isn’t verified.” This installation flow will include safeguards to protect people who are being coerced into installing a dangerous app, or tricked by a scammer, along with “clear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved.”
IIRC we already had to enable a setting and confirm a warning popup. What are they gonna do? Add more popups? A captcha-“puzzle”? Less easy to accept dialogs?
Probably a captcha puzzle, or some other thing that requires you to connect to them and surrender your data for free for their commercial purposes.
how about a $20 development license!
My guess is they’ll enforce a xiaomi-style thing where you have to login, wait, go through hoops, wait again,…
that would be fine, without the login and sim card requirement
Honestly a less easy to accept dialog would go a long way.
Just make it require ADB. Iv had my grandfather fall victim to a crypto scam that got him to install a app on his phone.
As much as we hate it, google is the only one who has any power to prevent abuse of the stupid, elderly and gullible. Someone has too.
There is a line of going to far to protect people that just makes things worse for everyone. But the reality is, our freedom comes at the expense of others freedom.
Finding the balance is hard.
Hot take: We shouldn’t lock down devices by default to a point where they protect even the most vulnerable.
Child safety locks exist for a reason and can also be used for the elderly.
Prescription pill bottles are a perfect balance.
You can put the cap on one way to lock them in place to keep kids out, requiring the lid to be pressed down and twisted to open, or you can flip the lid over over to make the pills easily accessible by simply unscrewing it. I’d be 100% okay with a step on phone setup (that can also be run at any other time) that allows the phone to be set up similarly.
Nah screw needing adb, that absolutely kills free and open source software stores like fdroid, and fdroid have said as much that Google’s then planned signing requirements would lead fdroid to stop.
The only way I’d even be remotely OK with another adb requirement is if
- it’s a requirement to unlock the ability to install unsigned apps, ie it’s not to an install an app but set a flag
- #1 becomes a requirement for Google certification so all manufacturers have to allow it
- It doesn’t cause other types of attestation to fail that we see with unlocked, rooted and third party roms failing certain checks preventing some apps, most commonly banking ones from working
I think whatever is required for third party apps and stores should also be required for play store. No special treatment for their own files.
Eg: “Warning: Are you sure you trust GooglePlayStore.apk? This software might be harmful.”
I reckon that Google would magically get the messaging exactly right with that requirement.
At least with something like shizuku one can effectively adb to your own phone, so even if adb became required to install non-google-approved apps on one’s own phone… It will not block FOSS for long.
and how do you enable shizuku? you need a PC for that too
You do not, it can connect with your own wireless debugging session. https://shizuku.rikka.app/guide/setup/#start-via-wireless-debugging Works since android 11
Couldn’t they just refuse to sign shizuku and you’d be stuck in a recursive loop of needing a pc anyways?
Then you’d need to run adb once for the first install of fdroid/shizuku. Admittedly not great, but doing that once will not stop many OSS enthousiasts. It would widen the gap between power user and normal user considerably which also isn’t great.
As much as we hate it, google is the only one who has any power to prevent abuse of the stupid, elderly and gullible. Someone has too.
Not far enough. We should require a government agent to be with people to verify there isn’t any fraud before allowing any money transactions to happen.
Wanna buy food at the grocery store? Please wait for your assigned NSA agent to verify that you’re not being scammed.
(Is /s even needed?)
In today’s society everything needs to be baby proofed. Protect this protect that. People need to take responsibility for their actions.
Your grandpa got greedy and wanted to invest money to make more money. Now he got scammed and he learned his lesson. Next time guided by prior experience he should/will be more careful. If not he will loose more money until he realises he shouldn’t be clicking and installing everything he sees.
And that applies to everyone. You alone are responsible for your actions, not anybody else
Until he has early dementia and forgets the lessons learned, but of course he’ll forget he invested anything tomorrow and do it again!
I’m all for holding people personally responsible, but sometimes we gotta help each other out. Also blaming the victim for being scammed is not helpful. Scammers do so many underhand tactics its impossible for any us to keep track of it all alone.
I’m okay with more tools to help us protect people. Maybe instead of needing ADB, you have to boot into save mode, and can enable 3rd party sources from there? This way you can still enable it on the phone while preventing a script or app can’t automate enabling it. Oh and because there’s more scam shit on google play than Fdroid, we’ll need google play to be enabled via the same method too.
Í get what you are saying, I also have an elderly mother that is bad with technology. But she ask anything that is outside of her usual usage.
If she starts doing some stupid stuff and she isn’t aware of her problem then I’m responsible for her actions. Because its not only her problem then but all of ours family. And again usually I’m the one that is stuck with the problem.
Then when dialogue doesn’t help I’m locking the device and make sure she doesn’t do something stupid like that again.
I need the company to provide the necessary tools to prevent fraund so that I can use it.
Not that the company polices what I can or can’t do with my device that I paid
Fuck all of this tech bros enshittification surveillance bullshit. I’m going to Radio Shack and buy a Heath Kit! /s
I’m not worried about sideloading because I use GrapheneOS, but I’m worried that development for various apps might stop…
So this sucks obviously. Will this also affects apps from alternate appstores like F-Droid or only APK’s? I mean F-Droid already signs the apps, right? I’m a little confused.
My entire job depends on such an app, so this is a bit of a relief.
Billionaires doing what a billionaire does: feign a reason to kneecap a service, force complaints about its ineffectiveness, then use that as an excuse to dismantle it entirely. I am so tired of this.
It’s all about herding people by dictating the path of least resistance.
This framing still sucks. Google is blocking apps THEY don’t approve on YOUR phone.
Agreed. But one climb down means potentially more, as needed. 🤞🏻
Only if the protests continue with full force.
