They won’t kill side loading (the fact we even call it side loading instead of simply installing software is a problem). They’ll just shoot it in the knees a little. No big deal.
They’ll be able to stop a group of less technically savvy people, who currently are sideloading, from using their phones the way they choose. Apparently that’s good enough for Google.
I don’t know, it’s possible that the number of people already interested in sideloading and savvy enough to do it, but not savvy enough to get over this new hurdle, may be a very small number.
I mean there are already some roadblocks to sideloading and scary system messages about safety and security risks.
I bet you less than 1% of users are even aware and of that less than .1% can’t figure out what they need.
They already don’t let you use Google pay if you don’t give them control of your phone. This is just tightening the noose a little bit.
That is more the fault/worry of the financial sector and not G. The fact that they gave up this amount of leeway is shocking. Their risk tolerance is very low and giving G the ability to manage virtual cards and allow payments with them is huge in itself.
Even Privacy, which does part of the same thing/idea, still only works for some cards, doesn’t work at all for credit cards (last time I checked), and has been in the sector for a similar amount of time.
G had to lock down Pay to appease the financial sector’s risk management. Anything else was DOA.
I wonder what an alternate history where Google chose not to become evil would look like.
What if they had looked at Microsoft’s Palladium proposal and thought, as pretty much everyone outside institutional IT departments did that locked devices with remote attestation was a nightmare scenario best forgotten, refused to build it, and made an effort to prevent anyone else from doing so on top of Android? Safetynet didn’t appear until 5-6 years after Android launched to the public. What if it never did? Android already had enough momentum by that point I don’t think the financial sector could refuse to be on it no matter what risk management said.
Well, I kind of know what happened in that scenario… because it did. Until Pay, there was Wallet. The original Wallet, not the current one. Wallet had a physical and virtual prepaid debit card, that you would load up and manage in the app. I used it a few times (new tech woo), and distinctively remember ordering at a McDonald’s, the clerk announced the cost, I held my Nexus 7 to the new nfc pad, they started to say ‘uhh no you have to-’ and then a success beep, and their jaw dropped. They thought it was nuts, I told them in a few years ‘this will be everywhere’.
So before Pay, there was Wallet, and it’s own little sandbox of testing if anyone would use this. A couple years later the Wallet card discontinued, and Pay took its place.
A different Wallet/Pay implementation is a possible outcome, but I’m thinking of a bigger picture where Android phones are more like PCs: no non-unlockable bootloaders, no remote attestation anywhere, barriers to root detection at the OS level, third-party ROMs encouraged.
The early days of Android were like that. I wonder if things had developed along that path, would we have a paradise for power users? A security nightmare for mainstream users? Both? Neither?
Push 3 degrees harder, relent 2 when there’s resistance.
Meaning, 3 steps ahead for them if there’s no resistance. 1 step ahead if there is.
Wait some time, repeat.
People shouldn’t use google pay in the first place. All of these things being tied together by the same group is a problem in and of itself.
People shouldn’t use google
pay in the first place.Would use something else if I had the choice
Don’t you have a physical card?
Less convenient and less secure.
I mean you are right; however, the point about security can go both ways.
We live in a fucking clown country the fact that the same company that makes the phones decides who can use tap to pay.
Its like if visa was the only company that printed plastic cards.
Credit card in your phone case, use your banks’ website, 95+% of people right there.
This framing still sucks. Google is blocking apps THEY don’t approve on YOUR phone.
The company has confirmed that it is developing an “advanced flow” to let experienced users install apps from unverified developers
How about don’t change it at all, Google
“side” loading is just normal loading for me. I have one single app from the google app store. (It’s cookie clicker 😂)
Even calling it side loading is an attempt to delegitimise the practice. To make it sound like you’re doing something dodgy by the side.
It’s just installing an app.
Nobody calls installing an app from outside the Microsoft store on their Windows PC “side loading”.
Likewise for Macs regarding their app store, or installing an app from outside your distro’s repository on Linux.
A “concession” to use your phone, and you need to give your address, phone number, and ID. Fuck off.
Meanwhile the Play Store is full of scams. This isn’t about safety, it making sure they get a cut from the scam apps.
They’re not killing sideloading, they’re just building the gallows and sharpening the axe.
The outrage doesn’t stop anything, it just makes them slow their plans and wait out the public outrage.
I fucking hate that word. It’s not ‘sideloading’ to install on my own device what I want to install, to use the apps I want to use; to not use the apps I don’t want to use. I am not ‘sideloading’ anything when I install programs on my PC. No different on my phone.
Fuck off with all these new bullshit terms that are only used to imply that what we’re doing (with our own devices) is somehow outside the norm, to justify the constant enshittifcation and the growing stranglehold these corporations want on our lives. It’s infuriating.
It’s not a “bullshit new term”, it’s three decades old and means transferring files locally from one device to another, instead of directly downloading or uploading from/to an external server.
The origin goes back to MP3.com and i-drive in late 90’s, but the most common sideloading people did was downloading music to their PC using services like iTunes, and transferring them to their mp3 players. As they did often with early PDA and smartphone apps, where the term for Android comes from - get the .apk on your computer, transfer it to your phone, and install it.
Sideloading.Okay, but Google uses it in a way where directly going to the server they host F-Droid.apk, downloading and installing it counts as sideloading.
If anything, using Google Play is sideloading by that definition, since I can’t just download a release from the originators’ server, they need to first transfer it into a secondary location, Google’s servers, and I can only install it from there.
So about those linux phones…
Aaaaaaany day now… guys…?
(I have a pinephone and no, it is absolutely nowhere near ready)
The Pinephone used way underpowered hardware when it came out.
Regardless, there’s been a lot of progress from postmarketOS and others the past years and especially accelerated once again with the original announcement to kill installing apps outside of the PlayStore.
I’ve also gone ahead and put in a reservation for the new Jolla phone to support another alternative.
My guess is that any good Linux phone experience would need greater funding from some company or foundation…(Valve please?)
That’s kind of a double edged sword though. Android got a foothold because a small scrappy unknown company in silicon valley brought them into the fold…
It’s not if it’s done right, android is problematic because it’s not a community project, it’s just a code dump.
case in point, the linux kernel itself
