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

871–880 of 1001 posts

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

#871

Post by YetAnotherNick »

ninjagoo wrote: post #845

It is way past time to build a 'people's phone', funding it through a platform like LiberaPay [1][2] or Open Collective [3][4], with a requirement for the device to be completely open-source. [1] https://liberapay.com/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberapay [3] https://opencollective.com/ [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Collective If we start today, we could have a new phone in 2-3 years. Future generatio…

I think you are 2-4 orders of magnitude off if you think donation could be enough for a project as important as Android where 1 day delay in fixing security issue is just disasterous.

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

#872

Post by mqus »

MishaalRahman wrote: post #42
tadfisher wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We'll see when this rolls out, but I don't foresee the package manager checking for developer mode when launching "unverified" apps, just when installing them. AFAICT the verification service is only queried on install currently.

Googler here (community engagement for Android) - I looked into the developer options question, and it's my understanding that you don't have to keep developer options enabled after you enable the advanced flow. Once you make the change on your device, it's enabled. If you turn off developer options, then to turn off the advanced flow, you would first have to turn developer options back on.

Why can't stores take over the "verification" process (like they do already)? Why do app developers have to be verified themselves, why does the verification have to be done by google? There are so many options, why choose google of all companies? Just laziness?

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

#873

Post by al_borland »

dataflow wrote: post #722
al_borland wrote: post #579

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate this pop-up so much. I don’t even have Chrome installed on my phone. How about open up on the only browser I have installed… This kind of thing should be illegal. The default browser is the default for a reason, to avoid this kind of stuff. I think I’ve reported this as a bug to Google a couple times, in a couple different apps… as they do it in their other apps too. The only thing that bothers me more are the…

> The only thing that bothers me more are the, “sign-in with Google”, prompts on 90% of websites now. It's indeed aggravating. Thankfully it turns out you can turn it off (and of course the option is extremely well-hidden): https://developer.chrome.com/docs/identity/fedcm/customizati...

Having to use Google browser to disable Google’s own bad behavior is unacceptable.

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

#874

Post by ddalex »

shafyy wrote: post #794
pea wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The darkest UX pattern I have ever hit is trying to cancel Google Workspace; whereby they disable the scrollbar on the page so you cannot actually get to the cancel button.

Yes, I want through this last year and documented it in a screencast. This is how it looks https://mstdn.social/@can/115243851196253381 How is this legal?

Don't assign to malice what can be explained by incompetence:

* new automated UX experiments starts * the UI bot made a change that made the page unscrollable * the experiment has a much higher rate of retention then the control (because people can't scroll) * the experiment is deemed a success by results analysis (no one looks at the page to see WHY) * the experiment is blessed as the new pipeline

Such an obvious business improvement made by Gemini !

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

#876

Post by stopbulying »

Anonyneko wrote: post #850
ninjagoo wrote: post #845

It is way past time to build a 'people's phone', funding it through a platform like LiberaPay [1][2] or Open Collective [3][4], with a requirement for the device to be completely open-source. [1] https://liberapay.com/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberapay [3] https://opencollective.com/ [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Collective If we start today, we could have a new phone in 2-3 years. Future generatio…

Open phones are all fine and well, but good luck convincing banking and government applications to work on those (especially in countries where bank login is used to access government services).

[dead]

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

#878

Post by NotPractical »

Retr0id wrote: post #183

They should let you skip the wait if you're setting up a device for the first time.

Or at least include this flag in the system backups and restore it upon switching to a new device...

If you get most/all of your apps from F-Droid, they're essentially establishing a policy of "any time you get a new phone, you can't use it for 24 hours", which is... insane?

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

#879

Post by staticassertion »

basilikum wrote: post #824
staticassertion wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely has to do with keeping people safe. You not caring isn't relevant.

If Google cared just the slightest bit about keeping people safe, they would stop hosting scam ads as core part of their business model. Google is on the side of the scammers.

Total nonsense. Google is a large company with different teams that have different goals.

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

#880

Post by rtkwe »

Markoff wrote: post #770
NicuCalcea wrote: post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of my banking apps didn't even run if I had accessibility settings turned on. I've since closed my account with them, just because of that. The amount of control we've given corporations over our computers is incredibly disappointing.

Was this in EU/US? This sure has to break some disability act to discriminate visually imparied in such way.

It is interesting that most of these are coming from apps outside the US including the fully developer mode lock outs. US companies seem more comfortable with the mode being enabled which explains why I've never really run into issues with having it turned on.
Post reply on HN