www.androidauthority.com/android-developer-verification-requirements-3590911/
-
It's also a great way to kill off a bunch of independent developers that make zero money from their project from publishing software for your platform.
Are they going to charge a fee? I don't see any mention of that, but maybe I missed it.
@hatzka
even if they don't charge a fee, it builds the infrastructure for allowing google, and only google to decide whether you can publish your software at all.
It turns Android into a permission-required ecosystem. If you do not have Google's blessing, you don't get to make software. -
@zoee @bigzaphod @alexia This is absolutely a market. Software wants distribution. Distribution wants an audience. An audience is a market. We are that market.
I’m not here to teach basic economic theory though. It’s plainly evident that malicious software exists. Reducing friction to publish software will of course increase the publication rate of malicious software. Security measures are always annoying, but are usually important.
Well that's wrong, distributing something and having an audience does not make something a market. See mutual aid for example. And look up "gift economy", hope that helps further your knowledge in basic economic theory!
Tying security measures to the will of a company that has the only goal of making profits is actually not the way to go. If they were actually serious about security, they'd implement better app spawning, use a more hardened memory allocator, prevent apps from using ptrace, and a number of other measures for better sandboxing that are well known at this point. They don't. Because security actually isn't that important to them.
-
www.androidauthority.com/android-developer-verification-requirements-3590911/
I must reiterate. I really like open systems.
This is the opposite of that. It's yet more infrastructure for Google to force dependence on Google Play Services in the wider Android ecosystem.
It's also a great way to kill off a bunch of independent developers that make zero money from their project from publishing software for your platform.
This idea needs to be canned. -
@beeoproblem @bigzaphod OP asked me to get the fuck out of his replied, so this comment omits him. Please reply here if you need to continue.
@RyanHyde @bigzaphod if your issue is not trusting J Random Developer you already have a solution that mostly works. Get your apps from a trusted and vetted app store and never side load. You never need to trust J Ransom Dev ever again.
If one decides to forego that protection then it's on them. Google is pretending to solve a problem that barely exists likely to get around recent court rulings. If they actually cared about security they'd vet play store apps more thoroughly.
-
@alexia @bigzaphod What’s cool about anarchy is that it always works because everyone is altruistic. See also libertarianism.
whats cool about centralized authority figures is that they are universally serve the express purpose of causing harm, and being oppressive; and violating human rights.
*gestures the everything*
-
@alexia I guess I've bought my last smartphone then. Can't deal w/ Apple's walled garden. If Android goes there too, I'm out. Fuck this shit.
@48kRAM oh dont worry if you're running any device that still has Google Play you will almost certainly be affected
: ) -
@RyanHyde @alexia @bigzaphod and what's cool about relying on big centralised bureaucracies to make sure everyone plays nicely is that they're always benevolent, always hyper-efficient, never make mistakes, and never leak confidential information. see also the US government.
(this *is* how we play this game, right?)
@thamesynne @RyanHyde @alexia @bigzaphod
can't forget- they also rely on deliberately and guaranteeing to 'not playing nice' (i.e *violence, abuse, and mistreatment, and human rights violations*) when people don't follow their idea on what 'playing nicely' is, and at the same time perpertrate a soceity where that is seen is completely fine and acceptable as long as their the ones doing it, and that fosters dehumanization towards its victims; and promotes a system that actively incentivizes not being altruistic;
see libertarianism: ok lets look at it, so basically they say that all that is bad if the one doing it is called the state, but if its called a corperation then it's magically fine, (and some variants of it say the state should ONLY cause harm; and not things like healthcare or running libraries)
yeah so the issue is that your saying its magically fine to do that,
but of course; this logic only applies if your supporting the status quo.
(for OP: confidential information being leaked is good.)
-
www.androidauthority.com/android-developer-verification-requirements-3590911/
I must reiterate. I really like open systems.
This is the opposite of that. It's yet more infrastructure for Google to force dependence on Google Play Services in the wider Android ecosystem.
It's also a great way to kill off a bunch of independent developers that make zero money from their project from publishing software for your platform.
This idea needs to be canned.@alexia As one of those independent developers that make zero money from my project... fucking hell.
This doesn't really "affect /me/" directly (I (also) publish to Google Play, so I already had to go through this, and thankfully I'm in a place where I can afford to do so while staying relatively safe).
But goddamn does this shit still make my blood boil. I care about what people *in general* can do, not just me. I care about people having the easy option to fork it, for that matter. I also happen to be in a place where a decent chunk of my contributors don't have a development background at all, let alone for Android specifically.
And goddamn does it leave a bitter aftertaste, making me reluctant to give them more of my free labour.
But I also have no realistic plan B, or any real idea what it would look like. iOS is just jumping out of the ashes and into the fire. Mainline phone Linux (Pine, Librem, etc) is just wildly impractical as a sole phone (I can't even file my taxes without BankID..). And what else is there?
-
@RyanHyde @bigzaphod @alexia Yeah okay but that's exactly what this is doing? Google will have the choice to approve or not of a developer. That's absolute and they will abuse this, as companies always do.
What even is the "free rein" for developers you are talking about? That they can make and publish stuff without being forced to go through 50 hoops including revealing their identity to get the approval of your favorite megacorp? Maybe I, a user, don't want a corporation to have more power over my own hardware than me?
We're not even talking about an "industry", or a "market"? This is nonsensical
@zoee @RyanHyde @bigzaphod @alexia this is the free reign in question, and probably why these stories are breaking at the same time: https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/malicious-android-apps-with-19m-installs-removed-from-google-play/
-
@thamesynne @alexia @bigzaphod Not really, to answer your last question. A repudiation of one dumb idea isn’t an endorsement of its inversion. What’s fun about middle ground is that it always exists, and there’s more of it than you’d think!
@RyanHyde @thamesynne @alexia @bigzaphod
not endorsing the first idea-- is endorsing anarchy, otherwise your just endorsing the first one again;
there is no 'middle ground' on this -- that's just unironically doing the centrist meme where its like "what if we murder half the jews"
.. either you support actual human rights (i.e where they arent violated just because an authority figure said so) .. or you don't ...
it sounds like you don't.
-
@thamesynne @alexia @bigzaphod Not really, to answer your last question. A repudiation of one dumb idea isn’t an endorsement of its inversion. What’s fun about middle ground is that it always exists, and there’s more of it than you’d think!
@RyanHyde the middle ground already exists, and it's the current side-loading process, which requires you to *explicitly* choose a somewhat obscure setting, to allow installation of apps of "unknown sources"
someone who is sideloading will generally already know what they're doing, since they have to flip this permission on. even if done permanently, it's not a global option but a per-app option to allow such installs from, say, the file manager. malware detection via Google Play Protect is *also* already a thing, mentioned in the linked article
you appear to have assumed that arguing against centralized signature verifiers to be *allowed to develop for Android,* means arguing against *any* attempt at verification. instead, it's really just: "Android, let's not do exactly what Apple is doing to wall in the garden, thanks"
seems like the best middle ground would be for Google to simply, not do this thing
-
www.androidauthority.com/android-developer-verification-requirements-3590911/
I must reiterate. I really like open systems.
This is the opposite of that. It's yet more infrastructure for Google to force dependence on Google Play Services in the wider Android ecosystem.
It's also a great way to kill off a bunch of independent developers that make zero money from their project from publishing software for your platform.
This idea needs to be canned. -
@alexia As one of those independent developers that make zero money from my project... fucking hell.
This doesn't really "affect /me/" directly (I (also) publish to Google Play, so I already had to go through this, and thankfully I'm in a place where I can afford to do so while staying relatively safe).
But goddamn does this shit still make my blood boil. I care about what people *in general* can do, not just me. I care about people having the easy option to fork it, for that matter. I also happen to be in a place where a decent chunk of my contributors don't have a development background at all, let alone for Android specifically.
And goddamn does it leave a bitter aftertaste, making me reluctant to give them more of my free labour.
But I also have no realistic plan B, or any real idea what it would look like. iOS is just jumping out of the ashes and into the fire. Mainline phone Linux (Pine, Librem, etc) is just wildly impractical as a sole phone (I can't even file my taxes without BankID..). And what else is there?
@natkr
Well, I'm sure I dont have to explain to you how BankID and a phone in general being required is another vector through which Google ensures vendor lock-in
We really need regulation for these things. -
@alexia I can't wait until there's a ready for prime time mobile Linux distro. Maybe it's time to try some of the alpha alternatives to Android that I understand are out there?
@elaterite If you're looking for something with a more pragmatic "make it work first" approach youre probably interested in the UBPorts project, which maintain Ubuntu Touch nowadays, but they use a lot of the original vendor stuff from Android.
If you're looking for something more idealistic, working towards a future where our devices run mainline Linux, look to postmarketos.org -
@elaterite If you're looking for something with a more pragmatic "make it work first" approach youre probably interested in the UBPorts project, which maintain Ubuntu Touch nowadays, but they use a lot of the original vendor stuff from Android.
If you're looking for something more idealistic, working towards a future where our devices run mainline Linux, look to postmarketos.org -
@bigzaphod @alexia False equivalency. Your garage contraption doesn’t have the same potential for harm as software. Your novel can never log my keystrokes.
-
@alex02
Well, no, not a misunderstanding at all. That is exactly what they mean.
Check the primary source: developer.android.com/developer-verification -
@alex02
Well, no, not a misunderstanding at all. That is exactly what they mean.
Check the primary source: developer.android.com/developer-verification -
@natkr
Well, I'm sure I dont have to explain to you how BankID and a phone in general being required is another vector through which Google ensures vendor lock-in
We really need regulation for these things. -
@bigzaphod @alexia False equivalency. Your garage contraption doesn’t have the same potential for harm as software. Your novel can never log my keystrokes.
@RyanHyde @bigzaphod @alexia fun fact: lots of trojan horses on google play with verified status. grammarly is one example. does "ai-powered text correction", and sends all text you enter into any form to its servers to achieve that.
the fallacy here is seeing google as a trustable arbiter.