101–109 of 109 posts
Heck, you could probably even automate that process with Google's technology. If OCR technology can identify captchas, it can probably identify button shapes in images or text that looks like program information.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you want to limit creativity and empower big companies even more by pushing forward walled gardens, because there are too many ads on the download page of one paint app out of a myriad? It's like adding regexp to have one more problem.
How does it "empower" big companies? With app stores, distribution is easier and people are more likely to download an app knowing that it won't install malware, they have fine grained control over what the app can do (at least on iOS) and they can pay just buy putting their thumb on the fingerprint sensor. Compare that to distributing apps on the internet where you have to trust each software provider with your cred…
However I believe good package formats and OS-level checks can get us there without compromising my private informations to a third party in the process.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What it illustrates the need for is understanding why you're receiving things (which is a pretty vital outside of software, too). If you pay for your product then you won't see phishing on the download page. If it's a subscription fee, then they're going to make it difficult to abandon or switch away from. And if it's "free", then who knows what's going on - maybe the product will wantonly encourage spending money (a…
Look at all of the open source software that is there for the common good, but is still hijacked with crapware by places like SourceForge and Download.com. You can even search for Windows drivers and instead of getting drivers from the manufacturer, you end up with malware from a third party site.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look at all of the open source software that is there for the common good, but is still hijacked with crapware by places like SourceForge and Download.com. You can even search for Windows drivers and instead of getting drivers from the manufacturer, you end up with malware from a third party site.
.. and that's the profit model of sourceforge etc. You need to consider all parties involved, of course.
What do most non devs gain by an "open system" that a well functioning App Store that forces apps to be sandboxed where the user has to grant permissions individually to apps?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does it "empower" big companies? With app stores, distribution is easier and people are more likely to download an app knowing that it won't install malware, they have fine grained control over what the app can do (at least on iOS) and they can pay just buy putting their thumb on the fingerprint sensor. Compare that to distributing apps on the internet where you have to trust each software provider with your cred…
What I'm reading is that you like a process to be enforced to guarantee some level of quality, which is indeed something I like as well. However I believe good package formats and OS-level checks can get us there without compromising my private informations to a third party in the process.
The "third party" I'm more concerned about is the random app developer. iOS prevents random developers from having access to files, the camera, the microphone, my music library, my location, contacts, my browsing history,using cellular data, draining my battery by processing in the background, etc. without me giving explicit permission.
Even ad blockers on iOS don't have access to my browsing history and you can disable third party keyboards from having network access.
People must remember that Google is first and foremost an advertising company. 90% of its revenue comes directly from advertising. Anyone who thinks they will prioritize anything over ad revenue is either very naive or very stupid. Google's CEO declared it's "AI first" and they developed TensorFlow. If they wanted to, they could have easily prevented those ads from entering their network.
But yes, if they wanted to, they can divert their more advanced ML teams to tackle specific issues like this first and get it done. I really doubt this is a high priority issue for them.
I hope the author of Paint.NET will see this submission and removes the ads. I'm a big fan Paint.NET and made a donation. But this practice is just shady and makes no honor to the author of otherwise great application.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I'm reading is that you like a process to be enforced to guarantee some level of quality, which is indeed something I like as well. However I believe good package formats and OS-level checks can get us there without compromising my private informations to a third party in the process.
It's not about a level of quality. I can ask for my money back if the software sucks. I know when I download an app from the iOS App Store, exactly what the app is and is not allowed to do based on the sandboxxing that IOS does. I also know that the app won't have access to my private information without me giving it explicit permission when it tries to use it. The "third party" I'm more concerned about is the random…
Furthermore, you may not allow such an app to access your privacy, but Apple itself is above the permission and will happily gather all kinds of data about you, with your implied consent (after all you DID buy a tapped piece of hardware). That's Siri and every remote Apple service for starters, and god knows what else in their closed source shiny software.
The random developer is the least of my concerns.
Now a truly open model where people can enforce torch apps cannot ask for ridiculous permissions, that's better. Enforced by enough parties that nobody can pull the blanket.