Posted by robtherobber 8/31/2025
This was the case long before Apple, and started at the carrier telco's. Apple was the one who wrestled the control of the app store from the telco's, who were even worse!
Myself and a buddy built cool fun a bartender app (recipes for alcohol drinks) for the Danger Hiptop. It was rejected by the telco (t-mobile) because they were afraid of lawsuits due to the 21+ nature of the app. We never really got a formal rejection notice, they just stopped responding to us. It was also one of those things where you had to build the app first, submit it (to Danger, who then presented it to the telco), take the risk on everything yourself, and then get silently rejected. What a mess.
In effect fewer people use computers now than used to. They're all online but not empowered the way we had hoped. It's all vice with none of the good parts.
It’s already cumbersome to run your banking app (and other „required“ apps) on a custom ROM with all the attestation going on. I assume these distributions will bleed users and see a reduction in new ones due to higher entry barriers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI
So basically market forces and profit optimization is at work here as always.
However, if we can still unlock the boot loader and install Lineage OS or something like that and have a way to pay for developers to release their apps on stores like f-droid we can use the hardware.
The biggest problem with having freedom to use our devices is that the model is broken for the developers who support them. You "can donate", but from the numbers I've seen it's like 1 in 1000 donate. No pay == developers can't invest their time to improve the software.
So if there is "really" a substantial number of enthusiasts that are ready to pay for the freedom they crave, then companies like Librem will have enough customers to create decent and usable products for this audience. Want digital freedom - prepare to support the people who provide it.
Yes, that might mean that we'll need to have 2 devices, 1 for "banking/government services" that is "certified" and one for our own usage. Shitty but we'll be forced to do that sooner on later. The efficiencies for the government to enforce the policies is so strong that they can't helps themselves. And corporations like to have more data to squeeze every cent from the customer.
So if there is a working business model for "freedom" we might have a partial freedom. If there isn't we'd be just a digital farm animals to be optimized for max profits and max compliance.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gbYXBJOFgeI
Wow, that's in Talks at Google. Listening to the Q&A is just so weird. The audience (I assume Google employees) are openly advocating for digital freedoms and the classic hacker ethos. Crazy how much the Overton window has shifted. I wonder where those people are now.
You could install a free os on the phone instead and own the whole thing.
Correct. They are paying for the physical device and the license to use the installed software.
My Samsung phone is not linked to my Google account and I don't have a Samsung account. I have no WhatsApp/Facebook/Meta account. I don't use Apple devices or have an Apple account.
Possibly the only apps on my phone that have an account linked with them are Telegram and AnkiDroid.
You didn’t buy a physical book, you bought the paper, but the words are owned and licensed by the publisher.
You will need their permission to read it under an approved light, to sell it again, and even it lend it.
Wrapping the bs in a thin veneer or “software” doesn’t magically make it okay.
You are overly restricting yourself.
Now we have the first sale doctrine for many physical items. It’s not being applied to digital goods since we buy a license to the thing instead of a copy of the thing itself; or so the companies want to argue.
Stop giving in to authoritianism by licking proverbial boots and using their excuses for them.
Correct.
> You will need their permission to read it under an approved light, to sell it again, and even it lend it.
No. The physical media is transferable and the implied license carries with it. You just can’t make a copy and then retain it if you give the original copy away.
https://www.androidauthority.com/google-not-killing-aosp-356...
by strcat, Graphene OS founder https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44679100
I'm done with Google. On every front they are being assholes. The DOJ should have exploded Microsoft into bits and pieces back in the day the way they handled AT&T so that Google would fear the same.
What the future holds is unknown however.
Many more national services require an original OS to function, even if I don't personally use them yet https://github.com/eu-digital-identity-wallet/av-app-android...
I am surprised why so many people use banking apps on phones. The apps often use SMS or even push notification (because it's cheaper) for confirmation and once you got access to the phone you can do whatever you want. Also banking apps tend to spam users with distracting notifications, and they often require extended rights, for example to scan other apps, to access contact list etc. For example, one of Russian banking apps includes an antivirus.
> What about in-person banking?
Rarely. Last time I went in-person, I found that the bank switched to a model (don't remember how it's called) where the office looks like a cafe with tables and employees come between them with laptops and there was really long waiting time so I got an impression that they don't want people to come in-person. Although I had some fun overhearing an angry customer complaining that his card was blocked for receiving transfers and immediately withdrawing large sums of money. He wasn't able to explain the source of the money or provide any documents but got a promise that his card would be unblocked.
Luckily there are still banks with traditional offices.
Most apps work fine though, including all Swedish banking and authentication apps I've tried.
City hall should have information on its website why do you need an app?
Kids school app sounds like the worst idea. What information are you missing by not downloading it?
If you can. In order to be able to login to my bank's website I need a OTP which is generated by... can you guess? Yes, their app. Which I can now only run if my Android settings meet their standards. The other day it took me half an hour to access my banking because the app kept complaining that my device wasn't "secure", until I figured out the magic combination of settings to undo to make it work (including for third party apps that should be none of the bank's business).
They should just use one of those. These banks are assholes. They're trying to get you to download the app for advertising, marketing, and data collection purposes. Not security.
My bank enforces 2fa and the app must be used to log in their website. SMS is an alternative for logging in, but NOT for 3dsecure.
> City hall should have information on its website why do you need an app?
Certain functionality, such as reporting city hall relevant violations (parking on pavement being an example), absolutely requires using their app to submit the photos.
> Kids school app sounds like the worst idea. What information are you missing by not downloading it?
All announcements are exclusive to the app. Trips, injuries, etc.
Hostility is hostility, and when limited to choosing among devices that are a pain in my ass, Pixel no longer has any advantage. Google is converting Pixel into leverage for the rest of their products. Bye.
And even after that, the Apple ecosystem is even more closed down than Android.
Of android just becomes iOS but worse, then just use iOS. Currently android is iOS but different. But for many years now it seems Google has been shooting for iOS but worse.
Also Apple does a better job at standing up to government bullshit (where Google tends to stay suspiciously silent). So when they are on equal ideological footing, Apple as a consumer product company wins against the Google surveillance apparatus.
Basically: Apple is a better Apple if Google wants to turn itself into even more of a pathetic Apple wannabe.
4 and 5 are no longer supported (not covered under normal release channels) but you can still download images under legacy extended support.
Everything suggests that they will be able to support the new Pixel models.
> We've received the Pixel 10 we ordered and have confirmed it supports unlocking, flashing another verified boot key and locking again.
This is a complete and total ripoff. Everyone knows it.
Just pointing out that the deal with Google is implicit in the piece of metal you bought - and with some phones you have at least the choice of a free system. It’s more of a choice than I have with my iPhone.
Mobile phones are not, and have never been, general-purpose computers. If you think they're locked down now, you'd be completely astounded to learn what the industry was like pre-iPhone/pre-App Store.
I can still put metal in my microwave and set my home on fire, but I cannot sideload apps.
Apple, for their part, should have just buried the option to "sideload" deep in the settings. They could have put up a dialog, or maybe 5 dialogs in a row, each one scarier than the last, warning the user that if someone told them to do this, they are being scammed. They could have done it every time someone installs an app from outside the App Store. Make the user wait 10 seconds or a minute between each dialog. Put the option behind their passcode, or their Apple ID password. Void AppleCare if they do it, for all I care. They could have done any of this. Anyone actually concerned about their security would have avoided it anyway.
This is what they should have done. Now it looks like regulators are going force their hand. Why Google is doing this now, of all times, is beyond me. Have they read the news lately?
The regulation should be for phones, computers, and game consoles too.
I know this isn't an unpopular opinion... whatever. I gotta vent somewhere.
It feels so transparent that their concern isn't actually user safety here.
The solution is to integrate sideloading into the parental controls. There are already existing permissions in iOS to restrict the installation and deletion of apps, so adding a sideloading permission should be straightforward. (They can still leave it disabled by default and bury it a bit behind a few menus and dialogs...) If a family member is really so technologically inept they can't be trusted with their own phone, then you should already be making use of parental controls in some fashion. Set a pin for them which you know and they don't know. It's as simple as that.
Perhaps that's a bit harsh, but we should not be sacrificing these freedoms at all, let alone at a time when there are already existing solutions for protecting those who are vulnerable.
(The relative simplicity of this solution is yet another piece of evidence this issue is not really about the security of users.)
Play integrity doesn't protect anything, disallowing side loading has no security benefits. Thats just a lie, a convenient piece of propaganda to convince you to advocate against yourself.
There is no security on the play store. Can apps ask for way too many permissions? Yes. Are they open source? No. Are builds reproducible? No. Does Google check the code? No. Is it almost all adware and spyware? Why, yes!
Google does not give a flying fuck about the quality of the play store and anyone who disagrees is legitimately delusional. Have we looked at the play store? Seen what's recommended?
I mean, for fucks sake you can't download a goddamn calendar app without it asking for phone permissions and showing you popup ads.
Look - Google allows malware on the playstore because they have to. They make money off of ads sold on the playstore and advertisments in apps. Google has ZERO incentive to stamp malware. But they have every incentive to prop it up.
I don't need Grandma to download an unsigned binary from the internet to compromise her. Get fucking real dude. I call her, ask her to install anydesk, and remote control her device, all Google approved.