Filtered word: nsfw Reveal/hide

as a note, Fedigroups doesn't allow 'nsfw' stuff, however they define that, so do be cautious

Sensitive content Reveal/hide

I agree in spirit, but man... Its only 50% rentseeking... My elderly parents and computer illiterate siblings and coworkers would get in trouble fast if they weren't constrained by 3 software platforms: mint software manager, android play, and MS whatchamacallit. I have pounded it into their heads: never download software candy from strangers. (I live in an anti-apple pocket of the world)

But then, i guess all three of those do let you do your own thing to varying degrees.

Even the term "Side loading", makes it sound non-standard and risky. Which of course, it doesnt have to be.

#AOSP #OpenSource #GrapheneOS

Once you’ve bought the hardware, it’s yours, not a lease where the vendor still dictates your choices. Calling it sideloading makes it sound like something shady, when it’s just freedom to install what you want.

#freesoftware #digitalrights

Bold of you to assume that your phone is really "yours". I'm sure that by buying one Google owns your soul and that of your firstborn.

We need more competition in the Mobile OS market, and Google needs to be hit with a big enough antitrust suit to cripple them for a couple of decades.

the whole case of why I've always had an Android phone: I'm a dev, if I want something I can write and install it.

I almost never do of course, but it's completely fucked up for Google to expect me to register an account with their service to receive their blessed key material in order to install my stupid side project on my own device

but Eugen, developers will continue to be free to distribute their apps off of Google Play and sideloading remains unaffected!

(as long as the apps are signed by Google shhhhhhhh don't tell the regulators, the whole walled garden thing has been going so well for Apple)

on one side, how different is what Google is proposing from what Mozilla has been doing with side-loaded extensions, which they have to certificate even if you host them yourself?

on the other side, why did I see no one complaining about the Mozilla stance on this?

I'd argue there's a critical reason besides rent-seeking: security.

It's a genuine conflict between user rights and the need to protect the average person. Phones hold our banking apps, 2FA tokens, mics, cameras, and countless secrets.

When a sideloaded app steals data, the user doesn't say, "My sideloaded app failed." They say, "My Android/iPhone got hacked." The OS developer takes the blame.

Android's approach—allowing it, but behind a clear security warning—seems like a decent compromise in this difficult balancing act.

Amen! And then there's my cars infotainment center that I can't even sideload!

Edit: I'm sure there are some absurdly smart people here who could tear apart the dash board and hard wire into the computers pinout to do it. But that's a little beyond my capabilities.

I agree: if someone buys a "computer" or a general purpose device, your point certainly holds.

But on the other side of a fine line I imagine (perhaps older) game consoles: when the original Nintendo came out, that company was not expected to help you run Atari software on their hardware.

They'd not prevent it - if you could figure out it, good on you. But Nintendo shouldn't be expected to make that work.

Not-supporting versus actively-preventing is the key difference for me.

I did not know of this word. It sounds a bit like the word ”jaywalking” which was invented by car companies to shame pedestrians into getting out of the way.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaywal…