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

301–310 of 311 posts

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#301

Post by preisschild »

fsflover wrote: post #247
preisschild wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody was talking about GNU. Most don't care if the userspace utilties are gnu coreutils/libc or musl/busybox for example. AOSP is free and open source software.

You can't run AOSP on any existing hardware. Except maybe Pinephone and Libem 5, and only in theory. Also, you should read all the good arguments on HN why you shouldn't use Chromium even though it's technically FLOSS.

> You can't run AOSP on any existing hardware. Except maybe Pinephone and Libem 5, and only in theory.

What do you mean? I can run AOSP on Google Pixel devices for example.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#302

Post by fsflover »

PeterStuer wrote: post #185
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…

Because the baseband chipset protocols and drivers are extremely patent encumbered. Any FOSS project will have to rely on on proprietary blobs for this part, and licensing deals from the existing patent holders, Quallcom. Nokia, Ericsson etc. . You can see this is sort of adverserial to the FOSS way of doing things.

> You can see this is sort of adverserial to the FOSS way of doing things.

Example of the real-word problems with creating a FLOSS phone: https://puri.sm/posts/breaking-ground/

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#303

Post by fsflover »

sliken wrote: post #296
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

Great justification for switching to Graphene OS, more secure, more control, and google has to ask permission to install things and the play store is optional.

Unless you're against giving your money to Google and depending on their hardware and software.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#304

Post by aspenmayer »

notpushkin wrote: post #294
aspenmayer wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m thinking about implanting one into my hand :^) On the one hand, I approve of self-administered biohacking. On the other hand, you might need a Faraday glove to prevent tap to pay shenanigans by folks with a mobile card reader who bump check you. I would not do this type of biohacking myself, but if you go down this path, look into how NFC skimmers work, because that and compromised card readers and unauthorized…

It is possible, but very unlikely. You’ll need to know where my chip is (I guess for an average thief an implant is not the first idea of where to look for an NFC card), and then get quite close to me to pull this off. Even if you do, I think it’ll take about one chargeback to get your merchant account blocked. > roll out tap to pay from card to phone and phone to phone It’s already here! Stripe has supported it for…

> It is possible, but very unlikely.

Life, uh, finds a way, after all.

> Even if you do, I think it’ll take about one chargeback to get your merchant account blocked.

Well, someone's merchant account might be blocked, but carders don't necessarily use their own accounts; in fact, I would doubt that many do, but criminals are often underestimating risks and overestimating rewards. It's almost a truism at this point that folks who do crime are not usually acting rationally, but I don't want to stereotype.

> It’s already here! Stripe has supported it for a while now, and I’ve seen a bunch of other payment providers have it, too: https://stripe.com/terminal/tap-to-pay

Finally! This feature is going to help a lot of small businesses in isolated areas where mobile phones are the primary (or only) computing devices that are commonly owned. This can create virtuous cycles that are somewhat unpredictable, which should help make these markets more dynamic and competitive.

Thanks for posting that Stripe link. Here's some more tap to pay links I was able to find, eventually. The search terms match too much, so it is a bit hard to disambiguate legacy NFC payment flows that use traditional or modern terminals from the new device to device payment flows. I remember hearing about Stripe's work on this feature, but since I didn't hear much after that, so I wasn't sure if the feature had ever shipped. I'm glad that this tech is getting in the hands of end users.

Apple-specific roundup of apps and vendors that support the feature:

https://apps.apple.com/story/id1620226212

https://www.apple.com/business/tap-to-pay-on-iphone/

These two are available on both iOS and Android, in case that is important for folks:

https://squareup.com/us/en/payments/tap-to-pay-android

https://www.paypal.com/us/business/pos-system/tap-to-pay

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#305

Post by fsflover »

preisschild wrote: post #301
fsflover wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't run AOSP on any existing hardware. Except maybe Pinephone and Libem 5, and only in theory. Also, you should read all the good arguments on HN why you shouldn't use Chromium even though it's technically FLOSS.

> You can't run AOSP on any existing hardware. Except maybe Pinephone and Libem 5, and only in theory. What do you mean? I can run AOSP on Google Pixel devices for example.

It's not AOSP, it contains a lot of proprietary blobs.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#306

Post by 0x000xca0xfe »

NoGravitas wrote: post #252
benrutter wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interestingly, we are, and have been, at a point were you can publish applications that run on any OS for a while, with PWAs. There are very few software examples, that couldn't be distributed as PWAs, including secure things like banking, etc. With WASM in the mix as well, theoretically the sky should be the limit. Even more interestingly it hasn't happened - mainly because Apple and Google haven't got behind PWAs f…

If banks were to offer PWAs, they would probably demand something like Google's Web Environment Integrity proposal - or would be convinced by Google that they need it.

Online banking in the browser is hardly a new invention. It works fine, today.

The only noticeable difference between most apps and websites nowadays is offline capability and deeper system integration.

Native apps have been dumbed down so hard there is barely anything left not taken care of by browsers.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#307

Post by johnnyfaehell »

Perz1val wrote: post #161
johnnyfaehell wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that so many people are used to doing whatever they want from behind the safety of their screen and are now able to do a lot of things they don’t want anyone to know about. Now the law and common sense is catching up and we’re starting to see things we take for granted in the physical world are coming to the digital world. And I think a lot of people are scared of not being able to do what they used to o…

Yea, cus when I write a fanfic I should show my id to the company that owns the printer I purchased and own, before I print out a copy to give for my friend, ffs. Does that analogy make sense to you?

No because you purposefully crafted one that is not BB anywhere near similar to what was being discussed. Being obtuse generally means you’re wrong and know it but don’t like the truth.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#308

Post by johnnyfaehell »

Hizonner wrote: post #239
johnnyfaehell wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is that so many people are used to doing whatever they want from behind the safety of their screen and are now able to do a lot of things they don’t want anyone to know about. Now the law and common sense is catching up and we’re starting to see things we take for granted in the physical world are coming to the digital world. And I think a lot of people are scared of not being able to do what they used to o…

> Now the law and common sense is catching up and we’re starting to see things we take for granted in the physical world are coming to the digital world. Your concept of "common sense" is repulsive, as is your submissive attitude.

Haha yea me disagreeing with folks like you is submissive

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#309

Post by opan »

fsflover wrote: post #143
opan wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of the PinePhone and Librem 5? As others have said, it's already been tried. I bought a PinePhone, and after a few too many show-stopping issues (not being able to receive a call for a scheduled job interview was the last straw), I went back to using LineageOS without gapps. I'm not a developer either, just a fairly technical user, so when the device wasn't working, all I could do was report bugs, and t…

> after a few too many show-stopping issues (not being able to receive a call for a scheduled job interview was the last straw) When was it? There are no complains from people daily driving both phones in the last couple of years AFAIK.

Late 2021, IIRC.

Re: Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

#310

Post by t_mahmood »

Andrex wrote: post #273
t_mahmood wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My bank blocks my mobile with Lineage OS, and it's not even possible to login to the web site without the mobile app. Absolutely pathetic. Now I have to keep my 4 year old phone with 2 year outdated Android to access the bank application. Which deemed more safe then my mobile with latest security updates. Haha

If you're going so far as to install Lineage, couldn't you take the small step further and download alternate browsers to change the user agent? (Unless the default Lineage browser can do this already.) I run a Google'd OS for now but I haven't used my bank's terrible app in years and years. I use their terrible website via desktop mode instead.

Well, to add insult to the injury, this bank does not allow website login without the mobile app. Which is absolutely infuriating. I did mention that on my comment :-)
Post reply on HN