They're doing the same on YouTube. Just mentioning covid will get a video demonetized regardless of content. It's as if Google's position is that we have to deny anything is out of the ordinary, like it isn't touching the lives of every person in the world.
Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
51–60 of 219 posts
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#52I've long wished there was a more encompassing alternative to F-Droid, which would include the same payment facilities as Google Play (paid app, in-app payments, subscriptions), allow proprietary apps (but still give FOSS as a search filter and show it as a prominent feature on the app page), and offer plenty of user curation features ala Steam and make filters optional (which would allow communities of independent r…
Amazon have one but it's never really taken off outside the Fire device range.
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#53The engineers at Google, YouTube, get al are no more qualified to gatekeep COVID information than any other layman. People are only rooting for this censorship because at the moment it agrees with their politics.
Case in point: for multiple periods of time the WHO and CDC were in conflict regarding mask advice. YouTube's official policy was to remove anything that contradicted WHO guidelines. Should they be dictating whether the CDC or the WHO is more credible?
Do we really want tech bros at FAANG to have that kind of power?
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree. I am using the German email provider mailbox.org They even report how often the government forces them to release info with a search warrant. However, I have yet to find an email provider that mimics Gmail's tagging system (=> you can give n many tags to a single email and that email is only kept once on the server). I often think that Google's "Don't do evil" motto is stretched way too often these days.
They removed "Do no evil" from their guidelines.
For real? Now I understand.
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#55I've long wished there was a more encompassing alternative to F-Droid, which would include the same payment facilities as Google Play (paid app, in-app payments, subscriptions), allow proprietary apps (but still give FOSS as a search filter and show it as a prominent feature on the app page), and offer plenty of user curation features ala Steam and make filters optional (which would allow communities of independent r…
Nowadays there is Aurora Droid that solves the curation question:
Aurora Droid supports F-Droid-like repos, you can have multiple selected, and they may include proprietary applications.
All usual issues with Android's security getting in the way still applies though.
Overall Aurora Droid is still miles away from a "proper" store, because there is no payment, there is no user feedback (so apps are still ordered by last updated or name...), and I don't think the author plans on adding such features (Because it also requires backend work). That's still a nice update to F-Droid original app.
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
That article reads like propaganda for Google Store. > That's because Fortnite isn't available through Google's Play Store. Epic instead chose an unorthodox -- and more dangerous -- route for the game's fans. Rather than download it through the official Google app store, players need to download the game and "sideload" the app on their Android devices instead. That Epic is allowed to do this underscores why Google's…
Those security issues would have been rendered moot by the sandbox if they went through the Play Store. But really? That's the card you're going to play? That "every app has security issues" so this is okay?
The way I see it, a well-funded and very popular entity tried to bypass Google’s stranglehold (and high taxes) on app distribution. Even they ultimately failed to maintain independent distribution.
They probably invested quite a few engineering hours to devise a solution, as there’s a lot of code / Google services that need to be replicated. It’s unsurprising to me that there were some bugs in this code, and I think generally companies that respond to bug reports and issue patches should be commended.
Where I would disagree is if you are claiming that we should be treating Google Play akin to a low-level cryptographic library in the vein of a “don’t ever roll your own” approach. Allowing independent software distribution is usually considered a positive differentiator for Android. For this to be a viable distribution channel it’s actually extremely important for large and popular entities to be using side loading in order to build recognition and trust in its use. Ideally it results in open-source sideloading frameworks and best practices that the larger community can build upon.
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#57One of the most popular podcast apps, Podcast Addict, is dealing with this right now as well: https://www.androidpolice.com/2020/05/18/podcast-addict-pull... https://twitter.com/PodcastAddict/status/1261651512947691520
HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23219427
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
And Epic conveniently forgot to mention the part about the security warning being well deserved when it came to Fortnite... https://www.cnet.com/news/fortnites-battle-royale-with-andro...
Hmm... Well deserved, or a poor security choice for Android? The vulnerability appears to be that any app can overwrite an APK downloaded to external storage with a FileObserver. How is that not pathologically bad security on Android's part? > Any app with the WRITE_EXTERNAL_STORAGE permission can substitute the APK immediately after the download is completed and the fingerprint is verified. This is easily done using…
Definitely Well deserved.
That's not Android fault: you're asking Android to give you access to an unrestricted storage area (e.g. because you want to edit photos shot with your Camera app), and the fact that other apps can read/write to it, is the whole point of that storage. Hence you need to treat it as untrusted, and validate that you're going to install the APK that you thought you were going to install.
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
If Google specifically says in it's Google Play TOS that keywords related to COVID-19 are forbidden, then the decision is correct. Stop hating on Google! Google is one of the few companies that provide quality services for end-users "for free".
Legitimately, are you a paid Google employee?
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
>Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email us and we'll look at the data.
Re: Google bans my events app for referencing Covid-19, or related terms
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
How are app stores on Android technically hindered? I thought except the additional step for installing them, there is no difference in ability?
A 3rd-party application store can't update apps silently to name one, the user has to approve every app update one by one.
I fully agree with this for non play store apps from a security standpoint.