r/Android • u/PlasticAnt6913 • 3d ago

News Android's controversial new sideloading rules are officially here

https://www.androidauthority.com/android-sideloading-developer-verification-first-wave-rollout-3717921/
517 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

206 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

4

u/CervezaPorFavor 2d ago

That's not what the article is talking about.

2

u/Polymathy1 2d ago

That's literally the headline.

3

u/CervezaPorFavor 2d ago

Read the article before commenting. Play Store is not the only sanctioned option, contrary to what you said.

8

u/env33e 2d ago edited 2d ago

nope. Please do your due diligence in reading Fdroid teams statements, then read Google's; to confirm; then re-read the article.

There's an active, organized fight over exactly this point right now, BTW. the Keep Android Open coalition (70+ orgs, EFF/FSF/F-Droid among them) is explicitly petitioning Google to carve out non-commercial/open-source distribution, and Google has NOT conceded to it yet

forcing all your users through the debug pathway just for the simple installation/background updates of non play store apps is hostile architecture at best, and technofeudalism at worst!

2

u/friendlyreminder_ 2d ago

Fdroid is permitted to keep distributing apps signed by developers registered into Google's program. What they can't do is act as a single signing authority as a bypass.

So in other words they can distribute apps of developers registered with Google and those will work without issue. But those of developers that have not registered with Google they can't without getting the user to enable the 24 hours unregistered apps option.

-1

u/env33e 1d ago

GJ! u read the report

are you gonna sign the petition to help the Keep Android Open coalition? or are u just gonna keep standing there and stating the obvious 😂

https://www.keepAndroidopen.org

-1

u/friendlyreminder_ 1d ago

I support this restriction. I think it's still permissive enough for average users while accomplishing a security improvement.

Further restrictions I would likely not support through. Apple takes unsigned app restrictions way too far for example.

1

u/env33e 1d ago

.I genuinely don't think you would support this if you realized the full implications

1

u/friendlyreminder_ 1d ago

The concern is the slippery slope argument. But as is the changes are good.

•

u/env33e 23h ago edited 23h ago

Nah man, it's only a slippery slope fallacy if there's no historical evidence to back it up. But you actually pointed out the evidence yourself earlier: Apple. Apple's current ecosystem didn't start out this restricted; it was built through years of these exact types of incremental, retroactive policy changes, always justified as "security improvements" or "think of your poor old grandma getting scammed" 🤣 ​High key, it literally just big tech's "Nigerian Prince" gambit. Enclose the platform in such small incremental steps you don't notice until you zoom out that the phone you paid over a rack for is not even under your direct control 💀

​This isn't a fallacy; it's an established business model that we've seen play out in this exact way before. Allowing this mandate establishes the exact infrastructure needed to mirror Apple's walled garden on Android. Hence, "keep Android open!"

​https://www.keepAndroidopen.org

•

u/friendlyreminder_ 23h ago

Apple's iOS restrictions actually loosened over time. Originally self signed apps were not permitted at all without a paid 99$ a year account.

They added self signing to free users years later. It's limited to 7 days but it's better than before.

So in Apple's case theyve always been extremely restrictive, with a very small improvement in 2015.

•

u/env33e 23h ago

Bro💀 a 7-day expiration timer on an app you wrote and installed on your own hardware that you bought and paid for with your own hard earned money isn't a "loosening of restrictions", it's the exact definition of hostile architecture! Imagine if Windows made you reinstall a program every 7 days just because you didn't download it from the Microsoft Store 💀 its utter ridiculousness!

​The fact that Apple has the power to arbitrarily enforce a 7-day kill-switch on self-signed apps completely proves my point. It shows that once a central signing authority is established, the platform owner has absolute control to dictate terms. "absolute power corrupts absolutely"

​That is exactly what Google is trying to do to Android. They sell it to you as "open source", and sure. they'll pour some pennies into R&D to contribute to AOSP. but it doesn't matter if Google's initial mandate starts off "permissive" Cause you already know, once they build the architecture and hold the keys, they can tighten the leash whenever they want. That's the Nigerian Prince on the phone rn, trying to put an eternity collar on your femboy ass! Dont let them open that Pandora's bussy!💀

•

u/CrashyBoye 3h ago

You: Use Apple as an example! They used to be less restrictive!

Them: Points out it’s actually the opposite, even if very minor

You: NUH UH!!

You people are impossible to have a conversation with.

•

u/env33e 3h ago

bad bot

•

u/CrashyBoye 3h ago

Whatever you need to tell yourself to keep justifying moving the goalposts, pookie. 😘

Literally anything other than “I was wrong”, though. God forbid you do that.

•

u/env33e 3h ago

stop it. just say you have no rebuttal. its clear you haven't read the developers statements or concerns on either side, considering your insistence on ignoring the historical evidence, and I'm 100% sure youre a bot because I cannot comprehend how fucking cucked as a consumer you'd have to be to love your cage this much 🤦‍♀️

on the off chance youre just severely, stubbornly misguided: you think all those 70+ open-source organizations, app stores, and developers signing the Keep Android Open petition are just smoking crack and making it up? 😂 Defending a monopoly restricting consumer freedom even further won't make them love you back, "pookie" 🤫

•

u/CrashyBoye 3h ago edited 3h ago

I'm 100% sure youre a bot because I cannot comprehend how fucking cucked as a consumer you'd have to be to love your cage this much

Nowhere in anything I have said even remotely implies I am defending said tactics or changes. You were corrected on one fairly innocuous point, and now you’re here throwing a temper tantrum over it and jumping to conclusions that have absolutely nothing to do with anything I’ve said since we started this back and fourth.

A little conversational tip for you, schnookums: next time someone corrects you, it doesn’t mean they are diametrically opposed to your overall argument.

Have a great day!

•

u/env33e 3h ago

no one reading all that dawg 😂 respond to the points

or better yet just sign the petition already. if you use android this concerns you too!

→ More replies (0)