Is that an official Google form and/or who am I providing my (required) email address to?
Let Google know what you think about their proposed restrictions on sideloading Android apps. - Android developer verification requirements [Feedback Form]
Submitted 19 hours ago by Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world to technology@lemmy.world
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfN3UQeNspQsZCO2ITkdzMxv81rJDEGGjO-UIDDY28Rz_GEVA/viewform
Comments
IcedRaktajino@startrek.website 18 hours ago
AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social 18 hours ago
Yes, there is.
Here's the official Android Developer page on the developer verification program. Bottom of the page, green square on the right labeled "Do you have any additional questions or feedback?"
Link is the same as in the post.
IcedRaktajino@startrek.website 18 hours ago
Very good. I’ve seen too many random Google Forms going around just harvesting emails / info to plug my details into any that I don’t click into from a legit/verified site.
vane@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
You need to verify yourself before you submit. They testing.
11111one11111@lemmy.world 13 hours ago
Na. Used throwaway email tied to nothing. Selected the options that applied to me. Left them a cordial “fuck you and the horse you rode in on” feedback letter in the message box and submitted. No verification needed. The only chance for defense is giving them a number they can measure of people who will switch devices if they continue to pursue dev verification.
thedruid@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
It doesn’t matter. I made up the Emil address and it went through
masterofn001@lemmy.ca 15 hours ago
Closing the side loading option is a path to antitrust suits, a slap in the face to privacy, a kick in the teeth to independent devs and personal use.
There is zero reason for this other than wanting full control of how I use my own phone and how much money/data google can squeeze out of everyone.
I did not purchase a phone to have it later be functionally broken as features it had have been stripped in the name of ‘security’.
A warning message is all that is needed. The current toggle is enough.
We are not toddlers.
There are not possibly enough cases that it warrants such a restrictive policy aside from the stated reasons above.
Give me liberty or give me symbian.
How’s that?
yyprum@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 hours ago
Give me liberty or give me
symbianmaemoFTFY
lmuel@sopuli.xyz 4 hours ago
Symbian had package signature fuckery :/
Zak@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Public pushback on stuff like this does work on occasion. It even worked on Apple when they proposed upload filters for CSAM.
Google’s intent in the short term probably is just about malware, but in the long term it gives them, and governments which can pressure them the ability to ban any app from nearly all Android devices. Once deployed, there’s a near 100% chance of such a mechanism being used for evil.
Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
I don’t buy the malware arguement. Most major social apps function like malware (tracking location and anything they can). In the 90s, any app that did that (say to your laptop) would be tested as spyware.
trolololol@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
Also the true malware is currently signed and it still reaches millions of people, most of the time downloaded straight from store.
Zak@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
No doubt many “legitimate” apps, including some of Google’s own are spyware. This claims to be about the sort of malware that steals your bank account login.
I’d even speculate that most of the people involved are working in good faith; they think they’re the good guys and they can be trusted with that kind of power. Nobody should have that kind of power though because it always leads to corruption.
CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 hours ago
It’s only spyware if Google can’t monetize it. Which is ironic if you think about it.
WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works 15 hours ago
I would argue that was the definition even in the early 2000s. then it became a business model for famous companies.
Zombie@feddit.uk 17 hours ago
Google aren’t opposed to evil any more though, they removed their motto of “Don’t Be Evil”.
Maeve@kbin.earth 16 hours ago
Alphabet Agency company was never opposed to evil. They're like the "nice” drug dealer giving you what you like until you keep coming back. Or the guy in the van giving out free candy.
AceBonobo@lemmy.world 17 hours ago
I thought their intent was to (attempt to) reduce piracy
Typhoon@lemmy.ca 17 hours ago
Their intent is to reduce people running software they didn’t purchase through their commissioned store.
ardi60@reddthat.com 7 hours ago
if this policy is implemented. the easiest thing for noobs will be get a Chinese phone without certification from Google storage.googleapis.com/…/supported_devices.html like huawei (you can get a GMS support with emulator like Gbox)
mnmalst@lemmy.zip 4 hours ago
The problem I see is that the independent app market will not survive this if the audience of “normal” Android devices is gone. Most devs won’t bother developing apps that are not available on the play store, so alternative roms are not a solution in most markets.
markon@lemmy.world 6 hours ago
I did it and I told them exactly why and what I use and why and hopefully they will take heed. It’s not even some freakishly avoid-y reason or anything. I’m not extremist because I know that if I’m going to use a lot of this stuff I have to make compromises because it’s not magically going to get better overnight, but also we have to stand up for user freedom so we have some degree of ability to actually use our devices as we wish and install software that we want on our own computer.
Ledivin@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
Sounds like the thing that will finally get me onto another platform. Sideloading is the only way around most of these companys’ draconian restrictions.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 3 hours ago
What platform you going to go to? iPhones?
circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org 17 hours ago
There aren’t really many choices when it comes to mobile OS.
Havatra@lemmy.zip 16 hours ago
Not a lot currently, but what’s needed is for the snowball to start rolling. This means the early adopters will have to make the more difficult decision of choosing “lesser” options wrt. comfort and convenience, compatibility, and bang for your buck. All decisions matter, and it will have long-term effects en masse.
Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org 14 hours ago
Back to a Java flip phone then. Or just off portable radio based computing as a whole. We don't need portable telephony, and we certainly don't need to carry portable supercomputers.
Mwa@thelemmy.club 16 hours ago
True.
Linux on Mobile has a poor ecosystem and only works on older phones (older then most Android roms)
Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
I will transition off Android if this gets deployed, this is unacceptable.
pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 hours ago
Here is the direct link to the form
Mwa@thelemmy.club 16 hours ago
Its our chance to over turn this
SulaymanF@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
Apple requires some developer credentials and notarization for sideloading apps, to prevent known malware. What is the problem with this?
DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 18 minutes ago
“North Korea does [X], what’s the problem with [USA/UK/EU] doing [X]?”
Alphane_Moon@lemmy.world 11 hours ago
People use Android to note have such restrictions.
Something like F-Droid (which published its own builds from source) would likely not be possible with such a model.
ripcord@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
It’s certainly one of the main reasons I moved.
trolololol@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
First, we don’t have this in Android and we’re better off.
It’s another flavour of gatekeeping.
Second, why do we want to copy apple?
Lfrith@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
Apple method is terrible too and had to be forced by the EU to allow sideloading so tried to make it as restrictive as possible within the rules. And they didn’t bother to support. It outside the EU. So Apple is not the one to use as a defense of restrictions to installation of software om Android.
LodeMike@lemmy.today 8 hours ago
to prevent known malware
Nope
Wispy2891@lemmy.world 7 hours ago
Do you think Google won’t revoke the signature for apps like revanced or newpipe or send a c&d to the now doxxed devs?
Main reason apple did that is to limit piracy, nsfw apps and track how many installs so they can still bill the developer for that
stoly@lemmy.world 14 hours ago
This is silly. Google doesn’t give a single fuck. This decision will make money for key players and that’s the end of the conversation.
DupaCycki@lemmy.world 3 hours ago
It’s very likely that no amount of negative feedback will change anything. Why not waste some of their time anyway? Write to them, call them, spread the word. This is the only thing we can do. Even if it goes through anyway - at the very least we can make it as unpleasant as possible.
FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au 3 hours ago
Their AI will be looking over all of the responses, not people. No important person at Google’s time will be wasted on this.
Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 hours ago
Doesnt matter.
Give feedback and pray it somehow does something!
CheezyWeezle@lemmy.world 9 hours ago
I dunno, I’m sure there’s a part of them that doesn’t want to scare off all the free labor they get from the community developers. They are probably legitimately trying to gauge how much of an impact on that this will have. That doesn’t mean they are going to stop or change anything, but they probably genuinely care enough to know.
MITM0@lemmy.world 4 hours ago
You do it for posterity reasons