Live data from Hacker News

What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

f-droid.org

471–480 of 646 posts

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#471

The fact that we don't have root access to our phones is insane. This "sideloading" part is just the cherry on top of the dystopia we live in.

And if you do have root, there is a good chance you're blocked from using common services on your phone such as mobile banking.

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#472
post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe in some magical AGI future computers can do the work, but until then where else is the effort going to come from? It isn't going to randomly appear out of thin air, that is for sure. There is nothing else to "blame" but them. It's not the "corporations"[1] keeping you from that six pack, nor it is it keeping you from building a single payer healthcare system. Not wanting to put in the toil to make it happen wil…

I can get a six pack by doing exercises in my house everyday with some weights and resistance bands for 20 minutes a day and by spending 5 minutes a day tracking my food for a year. I don't think that there is a place I can go to make single payer health care happen, even if I spent 40 hours a week for a decade at a 60% pay cut.

Move to the UK

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#473
post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steam is a bit different, since that originated as a PC digital marketplace before complete root-of-trust DRM from HW->bootloader->OS->SW. If anything, I would bet on a shift where Steam on Linux requires a signed OS like Windows Secure Boot. Call of Duty and Battlefield 6 already require Windows Secure Boot. Wait, a signed Linux OS with Secure Boot already exists. It's Android Play Protect. Also on Linux, you only g…

Pirating is more of a problem of mismanaged price versus revenues. In the '90 in East Europe everybody was pirating because we couldn't afford any software not because "we wanted to steal". As soon as I got a decent salary I just bought the damn stuff and spared me of the headache of dealing with pirated things. The people pushing for drastic technical measures to "prevent pirating" are probably accountants, that hav…

> spared me of the headache of dealing with pirated things

Without any sort of DRM and today's internet speeds, pirating digital media would probably be like Napster

Greenheart Games famously purposely released a different version of Game Dev Tycoon for pirating. You can read the blog post here: https://www.greenheartgames.com/2013/04/29/what-happens-when...

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#474
post #450

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand what you're saying, but I still think it's wrong to blame the people "not wanting it". The corporations and politicians are really powerful and they go far and wide to protect their profits and interests. Yes, the people could care more and could stand up for it, but it's so easy to blame them and that's exactly what the corporations & politicians want.

Maybe in some magical AGI future computers can do the work, but until then where else is the effort going to come from? It isn't going to randomly appear out of thin air, that is for sure. There is nothing else to "blame" but them. It's not the "corporations"[1] keeping you from that six pack, nor it is it keeping you from building a single payer healthcare system. Not wanting to put in the toil to make it happen wil…

> "Corporations," in this context, is just another way to say people.

No, I think its referring more to the systems that describe how the group of people behave. It is an important distinction.

Also, the idea that effective and lasting change requires significant personal sacrifice and enduring hardship is yet another thing that corporations and politicians would like you to believe. It's great for causing inaction through human nature. Its effectiveness can be seen in anti-riot measures like tear gas or less-certainly-lethal munitions, asking people the question of "do you believe enough to endure THIS?" It's a rhetorical question.

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#475
post #36

I think we could set the bar substantially higher. Don't even bother with discussion of sideloading. Talk about bounded transactions and device control. What is needed is: Once I have purchased a device, the transaction is over. I then have 100% control over that device and the hardware maker, the retailer, and the OS maker have a combined 0% control.

What does this even mean? You don't want software updates? Or strictly only software updates that are 100% aligned with your wishes whatever they may be at the time?

why does having software updates mean giving up control of the device ?

Security Updates - They should be considered as in warranty servicing of faulty software.

Software Updates - These are turning out to be a scam in some ways. The decision to regularly introduce new APIs and forcefully obsolete old APIs/features is theirs. Consumers don't have to pay for it with the control. The cost of it should be baked into the initial purchase cost. A new feature that restricts access is an anti-feature.

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Instead it would be great if you join the fight against Google (and Apple) by using FOSS and independent distributions like GrapheneOS. It is the most secure and private option we have today. Most apps work as it is except a few those who purposefully use Google Play Integrity API to block independent platforms.

As much as I'd like to, the vast majority of android phones are incapable of installing grapheneOS.

If you can switch to an iPhone, you can switch to a phone capable of installing grapheneOS though…

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#477

Author here. I admit I am rather startled by the tone of many comments here and the accusations of disingenuity. Splitting hairs about the origin of the term "sideload" does not change the fact that those who promote the term tend to do so in order to make it feel deviant and hacker-ish. You don't "sideload" software on your Linux, Windows, or macOS computer: you install it. You have the right to install whatever you…

This community has pockets of people who like authoritarian control, and genuinely believe in Apple or Google Play as some kind of superego that they need to defend, that they believe is protecting us. This surfaces in many types of discussions, including discussions where they may be prompted to defend the locked down nature of mobile devices. I say it's just pockets. A vocal pocket. It's not everyone here. But it e…

Also don't underestimate the % of people here whose salary depends on believing that Google and Apple are in the right.

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#478
post #349

I'm struck with how long the history of Apple's earliest iPhone has shaped and produced long-term damage to the concept of digital ownership. Apple originally didn't allow anybody but Apple to create software for the 1st gen iPhone, and only later was forced "opening" it my market forces. People who realized they actually owned the thing they bought wanted to do what they wanted, which required circumventing Apple's…

> The fact that mobile phones aren't yet just a standard type of portable computer with an open-ish harware/driver ecosystem that anybody can just make an OS for

Such phones exist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Librem_5

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Librem_5

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#479

I think we could set the bar substantially higher. Don't even bother with discussion of sideloading. Talk about bounded transactions and device control. What is needed is: Once I have purchased a device, the transaction is over. I then have 100% control over that device and the hardware maker, the retailer, and the OS maker have a combined 0% control.

Also, let's stop using the term "sideloading", as if it's something bad or shady.

It's called "installing apps".

Re: What we talk about when we talk about sideloading

#480
post #458
post #349

I'm struck with how long the history of Apple's earliest iPhone has shaped and produced long-term damage to the concept of digital ownership. Apple originally didn't allow anybody but Apple to create software for the 1st gen iPhone, and only later was forced "opening" it my market forces. People who realized they actually owned the thing they bought wanted to do what they wanted, which required circumventing Apple's…

> criminally cheap and powerful, open phone ecosystem. It wouldn't, you need drivers for your modem, gpu, gps etc. It's encumbered with patents and "prohibited" software circumvention techniques, you're right about one thing it would be regarded as criminally offensive by our current legal system. Speaking of android, if iOS had jailbreaking, maybe we need a bigger prisonbreaking from Google

Did you hear about Pinephone?
Post reply on HN