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

Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

gultsch.social

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 184 posts

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#11

Post by Dibby053 »

I use an open source SPAM call blocker (Yet another call blocker), which works fairly OK by querying a local spam phone number database.

Recently Google Play decided to display a permanent notification prompting me to uninstall that "dangerous" app because it could "damage" my device. It's impossible to disable this notification.

This app hasn't been updated in years. It has no ads. The only network request it makes is a GET to update the local DB.

My theory is that Google has decided to take into account generated revenue in their risk assessment algorithm. That would explain why FOSS apps are getting the axe while the dodgy commercial call blockers that upload your call history to their servers are still up.

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#12

Post by dathinab »

My guess is it's a fully automatized decision which at best upholds the pretense of being appealable but in practice is not.

I.e. they checked 1. uses contact permission 2. doesn't have in their privacy policy that they process/upload/store the contacts => must be malicious so kick it.

probably they don't want to bother to have to consider if contacts are actually uploaded or not and just blindly assume they are

problem with that is a lot of privacy friendly apps do exactly that, access contacts for convenience features but not upload it

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#13

Post by realusername »

Dibby053 wrote: post #11

I use an open source SPAM call blocker (Yet another call blocker), which works fairly OK by querying a local spam phone number database. Recently Google Play decided to display a permanent notification prompting me to uninstall that "dangerous" app because it could "damage" my device. It's impossible to disable this notification. This app hasn't been updated in years. It has no ads. The only network request it makes…

It's just a PR game of shifting blame. Who's responsible of all those privacy issues on mobile? Google's own ad machine powered by the GMS running as privileged user or the apps? They chose quickly.

Both companies response to the press has been to blame the apps again and again hoping that it would be enough to continue what they are doing.

Occasionally they even blame the users directly, the play store page on install displays "Safety starts with understanding how developers collect and share your data"

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#15

Post by the_third_wave »

Conversations is on F-Droid so there is no reason to get it from the Play store. This goes for all free software apps, get them from F-Droid or similar free software repos and free yourself from the manipulations by the likes of Google/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon/etc.

Yes, I understand this limits the reach to those who know about F-Droid (et al) but given the way XMPP has been pushed out by the aforementioned corporate entities it is likely that those who use XMPP already know about and use F-Droid.

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#16

Post by dathinab »

MattJ100 wrote: post #4
cranberryturkey wrote: post #3

[flagged]

I hear you, but not a magic solution: "Apple drops PWA support on iOS for EU users" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39299007

which makes it very clear that the only reason PWA where still allowed by apple was to try to avoid monopoly marked regulations

the fact that they seem to remove them without any warning make it clear how much they care about they users (i.e. not at all, it's all about money, which should be obvious but needs to be said in case of apple as they managed to convince people otherwise)

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#17

Post by richardwhiuk »

dathinab wrote: post #12

My guess is it's a fully automatized decision which at best upholds the pretense of being appealable but in practice is not. I.e. they checked 1. uses contact permission 2. doesn't have in their privacy policy that they process/upload/store the contacts => must be malicious so kick it. probably they don't want to bother to have to consider if contacts are actually uploaded or not and just blindly assume they are prob…

AGB?

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#18

Post by sitkack »

MattJ100 wrote: post #5

This has been happening to a bunch of XMPP apps recently, and as a maintainer of another one (which closely based on Conversations) I'm fearing the worst next time I submit an update. The worst part is the lack of communication from Google about what they think the problem is. There are plenty of apps that do actually upload contact lists to servers (hi WhatsApp, etc.), and they are still listed on the store. Many XM…

Maybe Eric Schmidt is returning to Google.

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#19

Post by MattJ100 »

the_third_wave wrote: post #15

Conversations is on F-Droid so there is no reason to get it from the Play store. This goes for all free software apps, get them from F-Droid or similar free software repos and free yourself from the manipulations by the likes of Google/Apple/Microsoft/Amazon/etc. Yes, I understand this limits the reach to those who know about F-Droid (et al) but given the way XMPP has been pushed out by the aforementioned corporate e…

The Conversations developer also highlighted that a significant portion of his income comes from Play store.

So a reminder that F-Droid features donation links on app listings that support it (including Conversations), allowing you to discover how to donate directly to the developer (no percentage fee is taken by Google that way, too).

Re: Google has removed Conversations_im from the Play Store

#20

Post by dathinab »

richardwhiuk wrote: post #17
dathinab wrote: post #12

My guess is it's a fully automatized decision which at best upholds the pretense of being appealable but in practice is not. I.e. they checked 1. uses contact permission 2. doesn't have in their privacy policy that they process/upload/store the contacts => must be malicious so kick it. probably they don't want to bother to have to consider if contacts are actually uploaded or not and just blindly assume they are prob…

AGB?

updated the post, that acronym was in the wrong language (ToS would have been the correct acronym, through privacy policy is more precise)
Post reply on HN