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

Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#381

Post by tom1337 »

wlesieutre wrote: post #291
tavavex wrote: post #271

The part in the flow where you select between allowing app installs for 7 days or forever is a glimpse into the future. That toggle shows the thought process that's going on at Google. I can bet that a few versions down the line, the "Not recommended" option of allowing installs indefinitely will become so not recommended that they'll remove it outright. Then shrink the 7 day window to 3 days or less. Or only give us…

Pay verification fee to continue

so Apple then? They require you to pay the $99 yearly fee to sideload for more than 7 days

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#382

Post by zadikian »

jrmg wrote: post #193
ravenstine wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has nothing to do with keeping people safe. If it did then power users could continue to install their own software by being given that ability as a developer setting. The fact that some people are gullible enough to go into a hidden setting on their phone and enable that in order to install an app from a random Chinese website is not a good reason to take away everyone's freedom. Consolidation of power is all t…

This has nothing to do with keeping people safe. ...and... some people are gullible enough to go into a hidden setting on their phone and enable that in order to install an app from a random Chinese website are kind of contradictory.

It's not a contradiction. Removing that setting solves that problem, but it's not the only solution.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#383

Post by worldsayshi »

plst wrote: post #194
hbn wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People who are unwilling to figure out the risks just should not use smartphones and the internet. Sounds great in theory, but just today I was reminded how impossible this is when walking back from lunch, I noticed all the parking meters covered with a hood, labelled with instructions on how to pay with the app. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/city-of-regina-r...

What do you mean by impossible in this case? Can't you just have the coin-operated parking meters back? Where I live, in EU, parking meters even take cards. EDIT: I guess "just" is doing some heavy-lifting, so I won't argue this further, but "impossible" isn't the word I would use either. The city could revert this decision, definitely if enough people wanted them to (that's... I know, the hardest part). I just agree…

I also live in EU. In Sweden. Most places don't even have parking meters anymore. You're just expected to use your phone.

And cashless is the default.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#384

Post by hexage1814 »

hbn wrote: post #150
grishka wrote: post #87

At this point I'm convinced that there's something deeply wrong with how our society treats technology. Ruining Android for everyone to try to maybe help some rather technologically-hopeless groups of people is the wrong solution. It's unsustainable in the long run. Also, the last thing this world needs right now is even more centralization of power. Especially around yet another US company. People who are unwilling…

> People who are unwilling to figure out the risks just should not use smartphones and the internet. Sounds great in theory, but just today I was reminded how impossible this is when walking back from lunch, I noticed all the parking meters covered with a hood, labelled with instructions on how to pay with the app. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/city-of-regina-r...

I'm reading this discussion, and allow me to give you my two cents. It's not a matter of being impossible, but rather how much the rest of society is willing to pay to maintain such infrastructure (either through higher taxes when dealing with the government, or through more expensive goods/services when dealing with corporations, since companies need to maintain old infrastructure that most people don't use).

For example, I read that Switzerland voted to guarantee the use of physical cash, even enshrining it in the constitution, which clearly points toward preserving older infrastructure. However, if you have cash but no one accepts it, it becomes useless. So it would probably require more—something like requiring businesses and the government to accept that form of payment.

As many things in life, not impossible: but is society willing to pay for that?

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#385

Post by zadikian »

grishka wrote: post #323
themacguffinman wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it unsustainable when iOS has enforced even stricter rules for its nearly 20 year lifespan?

Android has about 2/3 worldwide market share and it hasn't had anything like this before. Many people, myself included, chose it exactly because it allows the installation of modded, pirated, or otherwise non-store-worthy apps.

The 2/3 marketshare must be almost entirely due to Android being cheap and accessible, not because those people need to install arbitrary software. A lot of mobile plans don't even give you GB/mo, they give WhatsApp messages/mo.

Not saying that this is right on principle.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#386

Post by kevincox »

xnx wrote: post #30
curt15 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one-day waiting period is so arbitrary. Have they demonstrated any supporting data? We know google loves to flaunt data. Something like Github's approach of forcing users to type the name of the repo they wish to delete would seem to be more than sufficient to protect technically disinclined users while still allowing technically aware users to do what they please with their own device.

> The one-day waiting period is so arbitrary. Scammers aren't going to wait on the phone for a day with your elderly parent.

I think the more important aspect is that people will have 24h to slow down, think, and realize that they are being scammed. Urgency and pressure is one of the top tactics used by scammers.

Scammers will definitely call back the next day to continue. But it is quite possible that by then the victim has realized, or talked to someone who helped them realize that they are being scammed.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#387

Post by wswin »

tavavex wrote: post #271

The part in the flow where you select between allowing app installs for 7 days or forever is a glimpse into the future. That toggle shows the thought process that's going on at Google. I can bet that a few versions down the line, the "Not recommended" option of allowing installs indefinitely will become so not recommended that they'll remove it outright. Then shrink the 7 day window to 3 days or less. Or only give us…

what's your solution to combat scammers?

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#388

Post by moomoo11 »

grishka wrote: post #87

At this point I'm convinced that there's something deeply wrong with how our society treats technology. Ruining Android for everyone to try to maybe help some rather technologically-hopeless groups of people is the wrong solution. It's unsustainable in the long run. Also, the last thing this world needs right now is even more centralization of power. Especially around yet another US company. People who are unwilling…

Start your own nation and then start your own company, then.

Nobody is forcing you to use a smartphone. If your work needs you to use some app, they’ll buy you a phone if they respect you.

If you’re so upset just stop using it. But you won’t.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#389

Post by chr15m »

In addition to a enabling it in this onerous way, this should be a thing you can set when you first set up the phone after factory default: "I am technologically literate and I accept the risks of side loading indefinitely." If it's set once during set up then none of the vulnerable people will have it set for the lifetime of their phone. A scammer would have to factory reset their phone which would defeat the purpose of gaining access.

Re: Google details new 24-hour process to sideload unverified Android apps

#390

Post by Aachen »

t_mahmood wrote: post #303
nolist_policy wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can buy a Pixel instead of a Xiaomi.

Why would I pay Google after this? I have gotten rid of Xiaomi a long time ago. For now, I am rolling with my OnePlus 7 with LineageOS, till I find a phone that's not completely locked down. Yes, it's old, but it gets my job done. Once I am off all of Google's services, I'll probably get rid of Google in most part of my life. As, someone who is a user from invite only Gmail, it's difficult, but necessary.

So like a Motorola, Sony, Fairphone, Shiftphone, Jolla... none of these are 'completely locked down' (though besides Jolla, they're all a little: they don't come as "yours" by default because of the contract with Google to be allowed to ship Play/Maps/etc.)
Post reply on HN