this post was submitted on 25 Aug 2025

79 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

technology@lemmy.zip

7,254 readers

2,926 active

80 users here now

News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.

What doesn't fit here?

The core of the story has to be technology focused.

If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.

Post guidelines

Title format

Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.

URL format

Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.

[Opinion] prefix

Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.

Country prefix

Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.

Rules

1. English only

Title and associated content has to be in English.

2. Use original link

Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.

3. Respectful communication

All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.

4. Inclusivity

Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.

5. Ad hominem attacks

Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.

6. Off-topic tangents

Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.

7. Instance rules may apply

If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.

Companion communities

!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 2 years ago

moderators

BrikoX@lemmy.zip

Google will require developer verification for Android apps outside the Play Store (techcrunch.com)

submitted 1 year ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip [M] to c/technology@lemmy.zip

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Google will ask all Android developers to verify their identity starting next year.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] INeedMana@piefed.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

WDYM?

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] INeedMana@piefed.zip 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

The way I understand what /e/OS is, it sounds like it should be able to not include this check

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] AntiBullyRanger@ani.social 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Unfortunately, as I still type, there’s no liberated deblobbed ROM. /e/OS, like every custom AOSP fork, is dependent on leaks &/manufacturer provided ROMs. After Google silos AOSP ROMs, all forks will not be able to acquire updates downstream.

Linux Phones, are not alternatives.

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] INeedMana@piefed.zip 1 point 1 year ago

But if the forks are able to tear out the gapps, shouldn't this "cert" check go with it? I understand that the check would have to be in the installer app. Even if it's a part of launching mechanism, it should also be possible to tear it out

Linux Phones, are not alternatives.

I'm sorry, I don't follow. AFAIK GRUB did not need to get some blessing to get installed on UEFI. So Linux Phones should be free of big tech gatekeeping. This exchange we are having here is on technology community, not privacy (where I would get your point)

parent

[–] majora31@programming.dev 1 point 1 year ago

Looks like we need dedicated hardware. /e is phones, graphene phones etc then.

parent