411–420 of 564 posts
If you can't install software on your own device, you don't own it. You are renting a completely government and corporate controlled piece of hardware.
There's a study on positive or destructive workers, from a business management pov. The finding was that the "bad" employees and the "good" are often the same people: a "good" employee scorned becomes the worst type of employee.
I think Google will be discovering some variant of this from their previous fandom, and it will be too late.
Dare I say it, I think we're being too harsh on Google here. When you own a massively successful consumer product like Android, which is foundational to users' lives, you have an obligation to your users to keep them safe*. Sometimes you will have to choose between protecting users who don't know what they are doing at the expense of limiting users who know what they are doing. In this case, they have chosen to err o…
> …perhaps you and Google have different notions of who the consumers are. A relatively small percentage of HN users have empathy for people who haven't the faintest idea how their gadgets work and no curiosity about learning that. It can seem inconceivable. I agree with you that normal people deserve safety when using their most intimate device, and that backdoors that can give technical people unfettered access wil…
I sincerely hope that a lot of people are actually better than how the stereotypes may make one think. Empathy (or lack of it) doesn't change the issue: users are deprived of choice and forced to go along a corporate decision, whenever it benefits them or not.
Ultimately, it all boils down to lack of informed consent and power/voice disparity between casual users and large corporations, especially when the choice is limited (and we have a de-facto duopoly). What you're seeing here is users expressing their dissatisfaction with a major decision that goes against their interests and that they had no say in. Have some empathy for those folks too.
I'm pretty sure most people who are unhappy about the news don't want to harm anyone and find no enjoyment if someone is harmed by lacking informedness. I'm very confident there are ways to present the issue and give a choice in a manner that is comprehensible to anyone, without requiring any technical knowledge. Every competent adult should be able to decide if they want to risk a thief gaining access to all their accounts at the benefit of ability to have extended control over their phone. Or be unable to install applications not blessed by the vendor, at the benefit of vendor promising to keep them safe from malware. I might not do the best job here, but I strongly believe that such things can be explained to anyone regardless of their life choices.
That's not what Google is doing, and their disrespect for user autonomy should not be confused for a lack of empathy towards those who don't understand computers.
Consider this framing: there's a controversy whenever it's acceptable that one could be punished for their choices on how their devices behave. I.e. whenever users willing to have better control over their devices should be punished by a refusal to access a lot of popular apps, sometimes even resulting in social awkwardness. I'm sure that empathetic people can see how this can feel unfair.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, we have mandatory Play Store services, so the experience on android is not significantly less locked-in.
LineageOS without gapps (no microg even) works fine. Very few apps require play services. I think everything from F-Droid works.
And there are many great apps available on these free Android devices that are simply not available on "official" builds such as NewPipe, because Google obviously doesn't want you to block ads on Youtube.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or use the banks website from a computer? Which banks do not allow this?
Ubank in Australia just told me they’re retiring their website in a few months, the app will be the only way to access your account. It’s digital only, so no real world branches either.
Installing any app I want outside the Play Store was the primary reason I decided to go with Android, despite most of the people I know using iPhones. If I can't do this anymore, I may as well switch and be able to use iMessage and FaceTime with them.
I just switched to the iPhone with the new cycle, explicitly because of this news. Sideloading was the killer feature for me as well.
And guess what, sideloading has never been allowed on iPhones.
So you just went from bad to worse. The only rational option for tech-minded people nowadays is to buy a device that supports Lineage or Graphene (ironically Pixels are good for this) and to replace the stock OS.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The ID check at the airport has zero to do with safety or security and everything to do with the airlines' business model (no secondary market for tickets), enforced by government. If it's really about protecting "airlines' business model", why did TSA recently start requiring REAL ID to board flights? Were airlines really losing substantial amounts of money through forged drivers licenses that they felt they needed…
> why did TSA recently start requiring REAL ID Immigration politics
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID_Act#Legislative_histor...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You do realize macOS has used sandboxing by default for over a decade, right? ChromeOS/ChromiumOS uses heavy sandboxing. Android currently uses sandboxing transparently, despite plans to iOS-ify the platform. Hell, Windows uses app isolation sandboxing these days. All four consumer platforms let you run the software you want to and they provide sandboxing at the same time. They also let you configure sandboxes, too.…
Mac apps outside of the Mac App Store really doesn’t have any sandboxing. And Android’s sandboxing is so bad, you always hear about the malware of the week especially outside of the Play Store. ChromeOS also isn’t open source. And expecting end users to “configure sandboxes” you might as well not have one. Firefox is s browser, and didn’t they tighten what third party extensions can run? Android - or at least the ver…
Apps can and do ship with sandboxing rules that will be applied at runtime.
> ChromeOS also isn’t open source. And expecting end users to “configure sandboxes” you might as well not have one.
I listed ChromeOS as one of four consumer operating systems used by billions of people that uses sandboxing, not as an open source OS.
Notice how I did use ChromiumOS when referring to open source software, along with Chromium.
> And expecting end users to “configure sandboxes” you might as well not have one.
Who said anything about expecting users to do that? I just mentioned that you could configure them if you wanted to, like I said in my GP.
Again, my point is that these are consumer products that billions of people use everyday that use sandboxing by default, yet somehow not even having to think about sandboxing is too onerous for end users?
> Firefox is s browser, and didn’t they tighten what third party extensions can run?
Yes, it is open source consumer software that does sandboxing by default without the user having to think about it.
> Android - or at least the version that most people use - is not “open source” by any stretch of the imagination.
AOSP is very much open source
If you can't install software on your own device, you don't own it. You are renting a completely government and corporate controlled piece of hardware.
Agreed, and the only reason I bought a Pixel is because it supports Graphene. But as long as the masses value convenience over privacy and freedom, nothing will change, and Apple/Google will happily keep selling them devices that are now primarily designed to spy on them.
When I have taken the time to educate someone on a very personal level about privacy, the person understands the value and will change some of their habits. We can win this.
A while ago I implemented some little feature I wanted for an open source app, and tested it on my phone. Only Android development I've ever done, a few hours' work: I wasn't going to get certified as an official Android developer for it. With this, I wouldn't be able to do it? Or rather I could, but could only test with the Android Studio emulator or similar? Similarly if I just wanted to make something for myself,…