This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
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. π€π»
Only if the protests continue with full force.
They won't kill side loading (the fact we even call it side loading instead of simply installing software is a problem). They'll just shoot it in the knees a little. No big deal.
They'll be able to stop a group of less technically savvy people, who currently are sideloading, from using their phones the way they choose. Apparently that's good enough for Google.
I bet you less than 1% of users are even aware and of that less than .1% can't figure out what they need.Β
They already don't let you use Google pay if you don't give them control of your phone. This is just tightening the noose a little bit.
People shouldn't use google pay in the first place. All of these things being tied together by the same group is a problem in and of itself.
People shouldn't use google ~~pay in the first place~~.
Push 3 degrees harder, relent 2 when there's resistance.
Meaning, 3 steps ahead for them if there's no resistance. 1 step ahead if there is.
Wait some time, repeat.
Credit card in your phone case, use your banks' website, 95+% of people right there.
That is more the fault/worry of the financial sector and not G. The fact that they gave up this amount of leeway is shocking. Their risk tolerance is very low and giving G the ability to manage virtual cards and allow payments with them is huge in itself.
Even Privacy, which does part of the same thing/idea, still only works for some cards, doesn't work at all for credit cards (last time I checked), and has been in the sector for a similar amount of time.
G had to lock down Pay to appease the financial sector's risk management. Anything else was DOA.
I wonder what an alternate history where Google chose not to become evil would look like.
What if they had looked at Microsoft's Palladium proposal and thought, as pretty much everyone outside institutional IT departments did that locked devices with remote attestation was a nightmare scenario best forgotten, refused to build it, and made an effort to prevent anyone else from doing so on top of Android? Safetynet didn't appear until 5-6 years after Android launched to the public. What if it never did? Android already had enough momentum by that point I don't think the financial sector could refuse to be on it no matter what risk management said.
Well, I kind of know what happened in that scenario... because it did. Until Pay, there was Wallet. The original Wallet, not the current one. Wallet had a physical and virtual prepaid debit card, that you would load up and manage in the app. I used it a few times (new tech woo), and distinctively remember ordering at a McDonald's, the clerk announced the cost, I held my Nexus 7 to the new nfc pad, they started to say 'uhh no you have to-' and then a success beep, and their jaw dropped. They thought it was nuts, I told them in a few years 'this will be everywhere'.
So before Pay, there was Wallet, and it's own little sandbox of testing if anyone would use this. A couple years later the Wallet card discontinued, and Pay took its place.
So about those linux phones....
Aaaaaaany day now..... guys..?
(I have a pinephone and no, it is absolutely nowhere near ready)
My guess is that any good Linux phone experience would need greater funding from some company or foundation....(Valve please?)
That's kind of a double edged sword though. Android got a foothold because a small scrappy unknown company in silicon valley brought them into the fold...
It's not if it's done right, android is problematic because it's not a community project, it's just a code dump.
case in point, the linux kernel itself
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.
The company says it is now developing an βadvanced flow that allows experienced users to accept the risks of installing software that isnβt verified.β 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 βclear warnings to ensure users fully understand the risks involved.β
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.
A "concession" to use your phone, and you need to give your address, phone number, and ID. Fuck off.
Meanwhile the Play Store is full of scams. This isn't about safety, it making sure they get a cut from the scam apps.
They're not killing sideloading, they're just building the gallows and sharpening the axe.
The outrage doesn't stop anything, it just makes them slow their plans and wait out the public outrage.
The company has confirmed that it is developing an "advanced flow" to let experienced users install apps from unverified developers
How about don't change it at all, Google
"side" loading is just normal loading for me. I have one single app from the google app store. (It's cookie clicker π)
Even calling it side loading is an attempt to delegitimise the practice. To make it sound like you're doing something dodgy by the side.
It's just installing an app.
Nobody calls installing an app from outside the Microsoft store on their Windows PC "side loading".
Likewise for Macs regarding their app store, or installing an app from outside your distro's repository on Linux.
I'm not worried about sideloading because I use GrapheneOS, but I'm worried that development for various apps might stop...
They must really hate ReVanced.
Oh, I bet. They probably hate GrayJay more though.
GrapheneOS is luckily out of their jurisdiction :)
Can anyone verify if this is the "new" update to the process? The article takes 75% of the way to get to this paragraph and isn't even clear if this is Google's proposed concession or an existing separate process:
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.
If that is the workaround, it sounds like it's still awful since it requires a Google developer account and really only would work for limited development deployment.
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.
Great, more hoops to jump thr... I mean... an "advanced flow", for gaining the privilege of installing apps of your choosing
Boiling the frog
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.
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!
This is from November, and is about the 'student accounts' thing which doesn't at all help the central issue of being forced to make an account to distribute your app
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.
remember when people were actually excited about new android releases because they were weird and consumer friendly?
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!
Fuck all of this tech bros enshittification surveillance bullshit. I'm going to Radio Shack and buy a Heath Kit! /s
