Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

commonsware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 311 posts

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#101

Post by m4rtink »

charcircuit wrote: post #42
microtonal wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that they are pointing at that using Android in daily life in a meaningful way requires installing Google Play Services because many apps require it.

And my point is throwing out all of AOSP because of that is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Whatever other FOSS OS someone comes up with won't have Google Play Services built in either.

Isn't AOSP developed behind closed doors, with infrequent code drops & zero community participation ?

Good luck building anything on top of that & keeping it in sync long term.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#102

Post by preisschild »

teekert wrote: post #28
charcircuit wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do not forget Android is also a FOSS mobile OS.

That "F" (as in freedom) is certainly eroding. Perhaps not by its source availability directly (although without any drivers, what is the use?), but very much by a company trying to lock you out of all the goodies that once came with it.

Even if Google would stop open sourcing AOSP, I think it would be much easier to fork AOSP than to start a new Linux-based FOSS mobile operating system from scratch

Obviously even maintaining AOSP yourself requires a huge effort and a lot of people would need to donate development time/money.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#103

Post by dns_snek »

itake wrote: post #53

While I am against the policy, Google only publishes developer's full legal name and email address if the app is monetized [0]. If the app is monetized, then the full mailing address is shared. If money is involved, it’s fair for users to know who they’re dealing with. Developers who want to hide their personal identity can still do so legally with a shell company. Taking it a step further, if I am going to run your…

All of those are fine things to expect from Google Play but the point is moot because this verification would also apply to apps installed from external sources where they shouldn't have any jurisdiction.

Google, just like Apple, should be free to enforce any kind of verification they deems necessary on Google Play, as long as they allow third party stores to be on equal footing, which they don't.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#104

Post by captainepoch »

beardyw wrote: post #60

I know I risk being down voted remorselessly but I have to put this in context. Where in the real world is anonymity considered ok? If I only put a flyer through someone's letterbox here in the UK, I have to identify myself. If I sell a physical product I not only have to identify myself but take on serious legal liability. An author can take on a pseudonym but only via an identified publisher. In fact that latter ex…

> Where in the real world is anonymity considered ok?

It should be everywhere, no matter the place or the platform.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#105

Post by preisschild »

enriquto wrote: post #67
sschueller wrote: post #2

The requirement of verification to side-load any app is fascist control. It is clear as night and day. Shame on Google and Apple, it was always clear this was the end goal and next up is also your PC. Right after will come the removal off apps they don't like and there is nothing you can do about it. Stallman was right

> The requirement of verification to side-load any app is fascist control. Even the language we are using to describe the situation is problematic. Why do we say "side-load an app"? It should be just "run a program"! An OS that doesn't let you run programs of your choice is laughable.

> It should be just "run a program"!

More accurate would be "run a program not approved by Google"

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#106

Post by teekert »

RicoElectrico wrote: post #95
teekert wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it so complex to have a foss mobile OS. I only have Linux PCs (laptops) and servers, 100% of my work and personal stuff is done there (though for work I do need to hop into MS365, Google Workspace, Zoom, etc, hooray for browsers, my final firewall between me and the walled gardens, though we can have a whole discussion on that). For mobile, we have PostmarketOS, Phosh, Ubuntu Touch. I really must try living in…

Foss people are on the spectrum and so never understand the common man. Simple as that I guess.

Well the nice thing about the spectrum is that we are all on it and that we draw imaginary lines ourselves.

All wisdom aside... I think you're right. I takes a certain grit to start to appreciate the ultimate effect of software freedom culture and licensing. Never mind the the whole philosophy.

It's like explaining CRISPR (yeah I'm a biologist) to a normie... Ok, so lets start with what DNA is... proceeds to guide someone through a lifetime in the molecular biology field....

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#107

Post by morpheuskafka »

Presumably this won't apply to Chinese OEMs, since even though their devices do ship a disabled by default Google Mobile Services (without the user facing Play Store APK), it obviously would not be suitable to require Google involvement for developing internal apps. The OEMs could set up such a debug licensing service themselves, but each of them would have to do it themselves, and then it would be impossible to debug Google-based apps on the devices.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#108

Post by bigstrat2003 »

charcircuit wrote: post #4

[flagged]

I don't think anyone is arguing that they want app developers to break the law, but rather that Google must not take away the device owner's choice to install any app he so chooses. But even to the extent that does involve lawbreaking... yes, that's the price you have to pay for freedom. You cannot give people freedom without some people misusing it to do bad things, but that does not mean freedom should therefore be abrogated. In the extreme, you could have a very safe society without any crimes if you locked every citizen inside a small cell that they couldn't leave. But nobody, not even the most ardent tough on crime advocates, would contend that such a trade would be worth it. We all agree that some amount of criminal activity must be tolerated for the sake of living freely, then... the only question is where each person thinks that line should be drawn.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#109

Post by fsflover »

teekert wrote: post #19
userbinator wrote: post #5

This shouldn't just be "questions"; this should be a full-on opposition. Do not give them even an inch, or they'll take a mile. "debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers." - Richard Stallman, The Right to Read , 1997

Why is it so complex to have a foss mobile OS. I only have Linux PCs (laptops) and servers, 100% of my work and personal stuff is done there (though for work I do need to hop into MS365, Google Workspace, Zoom, etc, hooray for browsers, my final firewall between me and the walled gardens, though we can have a whole discussion on that). For mobile, we have PostmarketOS, Phosh, Ubuntu Touch. I really must try living in…

> For mobile, we have PostmarketOS, Phosh, Ubuntu Touch.

Why are you only listing DEs and not operating systems? (You also missed SXMo and more.) There are many more operating systems [0] and two working GNU/Linux phones, Librem 5 and Pinephone. Why people are ignoring them on HN?

[0] https://pine64.org/documentation/PinePhone/Software/

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#110

Post by SanjayMehta »

rattyJ2 wrote: post #73
teekert wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it so complex to have a foss mobile OS. I only have Linux PCs (laptops) and servers, 100% of my work and personal stuff is done there (though for work I do need to hop into MS365, Google Workspace, Zoom, etc, hooray for browsers, my final firewall between me and the walled gardens, though we can have a whole discussion on that). For mobile, we have PostmarketOS, Phosh, Ubuntu Touch. I really must try living in…

I could be one of the people running an ungoogled phone, but my bank refuses to have an app that runs on an ungoogled OS for "security"

My bank used to block VPNs “for security reasons.”

Now they very kindly just display a warning.

Post reply on HN