▲ 1568 ▼ Google: 'Your $1000 phone needs our permission to install apps now'". Android users are screwed - Louis Rossmann (youtube.com) submitted 1 year ago by rustyredox@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world 499 comments fedilink hide all child comments https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Android_Developer_Verification
[–] singletona@lemmy.world 67 points 1 year ago (16 children) Apple now allows sideloading of apps and Google is trying to get rid of sideloading. What... the Fuck? permalink fedilink source hideshow 16 child comments replies: [–] Luffy879@lemmy.ml 33 points 1 year ago* (1 child) Apple now allows sideloading of apps Apple allows as much sideloading as google wants to next near. Yes, you can install from .iPa files, but you still need to pay 100€ a year to be able to sign the IPA files, otherwise you cant run them. as much as with googles new policy you now need to pay 25€ + your full name to get a signature, to sign the Apks with permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] monogram@feddit.nl 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (9 children) Now we have to get EU on the case 😀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [+] eleitl@lemmy.zip -14 points 1 year ago (8 children) The EU is no longer an ally in such matters but a bad actor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 21 points 1 year ago* (2 children) Gonna have to elaborate on this because the European union has both good and bad people pulling strings. If this is about chatcontrol. Scary as it is that the idea keeps coming back it has also always gotten shot down. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 14 points 1 year ago True. But it needs to be shot down every time it comes up. For them to succeed, they only need to succeed once. permalink fedilink source parent [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 year ago them bringing it up again and again is a very significant problem. Imagine you're spending time with a girl and asking her to have sex with you. She says "no", and you simply keep asking her daily until she says "yes" once, probably because she's just not paying attention to your actual question on that day. Such a behavior would be recognized by most people as being improper, immoral and not in the spirit of "consent". Now, the same is happening on the EU. They keep asking the same question after they already got an explicit answer, and such a behavior should be illegal by itself. No means No. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stormeuh@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago Why? Because of the chat control stuff? permalink fedilink source parent [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] simsalabim@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] wordmark@mas.to 2 points 1 year ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] Mwa 8 points 1 year ago Apple now allows sideloading of apps and Google is trying to get rid of sideloading. afaik only in the EU? permalink fedilink source parent [–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago To be fair, they are now both on the same level. Both now allow sideloading from "trusted" sources, aka developers verified by Apple/Google. permalink fedilink source parent [–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago Yea but Apple got sued into allowing that permalink fedilink source parent [–] Gumus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 year ago Don't call it sideloading. Did you watch the video? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Luffy879@lemmy.ml 33 points 1 year ago* (1 child) Apple now allows sideloading of apps Apple allows as much sideloading as google wants to next near. Yes, you can install from .iPa files, but you still need to pay 100€ a year to be able to sign the IPA files, otherwise you cant run them. as much as with googles new policy you now need to pay 25€ + your full name to get a signature, to sign the Apks with permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] monogram@feddit.nl 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] monogram@feddit.nl 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (9 children) Now we have to get EU on the case 😀 permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 9 child comments replies: [+] eleitl@lemmy.zip -14 points 1 year ago (8 children) The EU is no longer an ally in such matters but a bad actor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 21 points 1 year ago* (2 children) Gonna have to elaborate on this because the European union has both good and bad people pulling strings. If this is about chatcontrol. Scary as it is that the idea keeps coming back it has also always gotten shot down. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 14 points 1 year ago True. But it needs to be shot down every time it comes up. For them to succeed, they only need to succeed once. permalink fedilink source parent [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 year ago them bringing it up again and again is a very significant problem. Imagine you're spending time with a girl and asking her to have sex with you. She says "no", and you simply keep asking her daily until she says "yes" once, probably because she's just not paying attention to your actual question on that day. Such a behavior would be recognized by most people as being improper, immoral and not in the spirit of "consent". Now, the same is happening on the EU. They keep asking the same question after they already got an explicit answer, and such a behavior should be illegal by itself. No means No. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stormeuh@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago Why? Because of the chat control stuff? permalink fedilink source parent [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] simsalabim@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] wordmark@mas.to 2 points 1 year ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] eleitl@lemmy.zip -14 points 1 year ago (8 children) The EU is no longer an ally in such matters but a bad actor. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 21 points 1 year ago* (2 children) Gonna have to elaborate on this because the European union has both good and bad people pulling strings. If this is about chatcontrol. Scary as it is that the idea keeps coming back it has also always gotten shot down. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 14 points 1 year ago True. But it needs to be shot down every time it comes up. For them to succeed, they only need to succeed once. permalink fedilink source parent [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 year ago them bringing it up again and again is a very significant problem. Imagine you're spending time with a girl and asking her to have sex with you. She says "no", and you simply keep asking her daily until she says "yes" once, probably because she's just not paying attention to your actual question on that day. Such a behavior would be recognized by most people as being improper, immoral and not in the spirit of "consent". Now, the same is happening on the EU. They keep asking the same question after they already got an explicit answer, and such a behavior should be illegal by itself. No means No. permalink fedilink source parent [–] stormeuh@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago Why? Because of the chat control stuff? permalink fedilink source parent [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] simsalabim@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] wordmark@mas.to 2 points 1 year ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 21 points 1 year ago* (2 children) Gonna have to elaborate on this because the European union has both good and bad people pulling strings. If this is about chatcontrol. Scary as it is that the idea keeps coming back it has also always gotten shot down. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 14 points 1 year ago True. But it needs to be shot down every time it comes up. For them to succeed, they only need to succeed once. permalink fedilink source parent [–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 year ago them bringing it up again and again is a very significant problem. Imagine you're spending time with a girl and asking her to have sex with you. She says "no", and you simply keep asking her daily until she says "yes" once, probably because she's just not paying attention to your actual question on that day. Such a behavior would be recognized by most people as being improper, immoral and not in the spirit of "consent". Now, the same is happening on the EU. They keep asking the same question after they already got an explicit answer, and such a behavior should be illegal by itself. No means No. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] 01189998819991197253@infosec.pub 14 points 1 year ago True. But it needs to be shot down every time it comes up. For them to succeed, they only need to succeed once. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 1 year ago them bringing it up again and again is a very significant problem. Imagine you're spending time with a girl and asking her to have sex with you. She says "no", and you simply keep asking her daily until she says "yes" once, probably because she's just not paying attention to your actual question on that day. Such a behavior would be recognized by most people as being improper, immoral and not in the spirit of "consent". Now, the same is happening on the EU. They keep asking the same question after they already got an explicit answer, and such a behavior should be illegal by itself. No means No. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] stormeuh@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago Why? Because of the chat control stuff? permalink fedilink source parent
[+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago (3 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 3 child comments replies: [+] simsalabim@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] wordmark@mas.to 2 points 1 year ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[+] simsalabim@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] greenacres3233@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [+] wordmark@mas.to 2 points 1 year ago* [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mwa 8 points 1 year ago Apple now allows sideloading of apps and Google is trying to get rid of sideloading. afaik only in the EU? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago To be fair, they are now both on the same level. Both now allow sideloading from "trusted" sources, aka developers verified by Apple/Google. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] MisterD@lemmy.ca 1 point 1 year ago Yea but Apple got sued into allowing that permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Gumus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 point 1 year ago Don't call it sideloading. Did you watch the video? permalink fedilink source parent