I want an extra day added to the warranty of any device I purchase, as it will be useless during that time
Did we win?
Submitted 2 weeks ago by Mynameisallen@lemmy.zip to technology@lemmy.world
Comments
XLE@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
tabular@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
Software freedom or demise. While Google is capable of imposing anything then Android is already dead to me.
Rentlar@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
If the process doesn’t include any phone home stuff, and is just a one-time cool off period to prevent scammers, this is acceptable to me. That should be enough to get potential victims to self-question, ask more knowledgeable people of what’s going on to avoid being unknowingly hacked, without being naggy everytime for users that want to do what they want.
Making a software “foolproof” will probanly invent a bigger better, fool hoping for some sort of free crypto app jumping through these hoops, but this should weed out most of the basic scams.
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 2 weeks ago
It still sets your phone in a state that marks it as security compromised. This could lead i.e. to banking apps not working. I’m not so sure about the “acceptable” state of things here.
Rentlar@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
Yeah, I take issue with that, but I don’t think it would be used if people complain to banks that reading the flag bricks the app.
gwl@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 weeks ago
Sounds to me like you’re willing to give up liberties in exchange for comforts, that’s always a bad idea
Rentlar@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
I tend to favour privacy over big tech control, but I recognize we have to at least consider the cost-benefit of these tradeoffs, to live in a society. Of course I’d prefer a phone with no warnings, no nagging, if you get scammed that’s my fault and I will keep my phone that way if it means I will stay off Android 15 and de-Google my next phone. But Google’s plan is within the realm of an acceptable compromise to me because sideloading is still available to everyone without registration with Google. Each person will feel differently about it.
Taking your position to the extreme, if trading liberty for comfort is “always” a bad idea with no exceptions, you can turn off your phone and do without the comfort of it. (Only saying this because always is the word you chose to use.) To accept cellular and home internet services to communicate in the public realm requires you to give up some level of privacy, though of course it can be possible to stop a lot of the unnecessary surveillance that happens along with the necessary tradeoff.
freeman@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
No the scammer will simply point out that the warning is about scammers and not him, your friendly MS tech that called to help solve a problem you didn’t have.
Scams don’t rely on tech.
Rentlar@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
The scammer is not going to be on the phone with the victim for 24 hours continuously.
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I haven’t read the article yet, but I’m about to. But no matter what, I’m still looking a lot more seriously into Linux on mobile, such as PostmarketOS than I was before.
freeman@sh.itjust.works 2 weeks ago
Then make the wait period a week, a month. Have this privilege expire every so often etc.
Try to pull warranty shenanigans if you ever went through the process.
webkitten@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
You win by disabling software updates at Android 15.
SkavarSharraddas@gehirneimer.de 2 weeks ago
Not if it's implemented in the Google Play Services, then every device will refuse to install unverified apps after the deadline, even if it's not on the newest Android versions.
artyom@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
Its seems fine, other than the whole “coaching” thing. Like, nobody knows how to do this today, so someone will have to “coach” them through it, even if it’s Google themselves.
But I would wait and see exactly how it’s implemented before calling off the resistance.
Rekall_Incorporated@piefed.social 2 weeks ago
Nah, American companies cannot be relied upon by definition. Even if the people running one are fine (and many are), they are still based in what is essentially a pro-crime, pro-corruption jurisdiction.
Bloefz@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
What do they mean reauthenticate after 24h? I can’t authenticate as I don’t have a Google account. Although I do unfortunately have Google play installed, my phones can’t have it removed.
SkavarSharraddas@gehirneimer.de 2 weeks ago
Whatever you use to login, password / pin / pattern / body part.
mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
at best this is not losing at this very moment
shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 2 weeks ago
I think the 24 hour wait is at least a sensible alternative. Anybody who’s going to be seriously installing apps on their devices like this is probably going to be using Lineage OS or Graphene OS or /e/OS or something like that anyway. And in that case, they will be using AOSP and not be subject to this because they’re not running a Google certified device.
While I’m not particularly happy about this change, I think it could be way worse.
Something tells me that Google drastically underestimated the amount of pushback they were going to get when they announced this. I mean, very drastically underestimated.
nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 weeks ago
nobody here read the part where side loading was never going to be disabled
Auli@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
I don’t know. For one in don’t noble how bad the problem is and the that the big thing. We who install apps are not the target for this issue. But the 99% of other people who can fall for these scams is who this is for. And I can handle a little in convince if it stops some scammers from cleaning out peoples life savings.
DonPiano@lemmy.ca 2 weeks ago
This is a premature April Fool’s joke, right?
gergolippai@lemmy.world 2 weeks ago
the win in this is that many people realise how locked google has made android and how blatantly and arbitrarily google exerts their control over it. hopefully that will be input to some consumer decision (when sailfish becomes an alternative) and a tiny bit more people will consider their choice when getting a new phone. and maybe it also helps some regulation to be agreed (in europe, obviously).