poopkins
@poopkins@lemmy.world
- Comment on Sam Altman and husband reportedly working to genetically engineer babies from having hereditary disease 1 week ago:
I understand what the word means, but in which domain are the effects unpredictable? In terms of policy and enforcement of what may or may not be genetically modified, or what the genetic outcome would be of gene modification? I agree with the prior.
- Comment on Sam Altman and husband reportedly working to genetically engineer babies from having hereditary disease 1 week ago:
What do you mean with unforeseen effects in this context?
- Comment on Sam Altman and husband reportedly working to genetically engineer babies from having hereditary disease 1 week ago:
It’s an interesting ethical debate.
I have a hereditary condition which passes only by the X chromosome, so should I, as a man, abort a daughter? Because now the risk is too high and I’ve elected to simply not have children. It would be great if I could fix the single swapped base pair that would otherwise cause disfigurement and life-long health problems.
- Comment on Breaking: Google is easing up on Android's new sideloading restrictions! 1 week ago:
That’s a unique perspective. Thanks for sharing.
- Comment on Breaking: Google is easing up on Android's new sideloading restrictions! 1 week ago:
Ironically, in my attempts to find any kind of information about this, it only resulted in news articles reporting on the number of developer accounts banned and announcements from Google warning users about scams and providing recommendations to safeguard themselves.
I don’t agree that Google has taken a singular approach to this problem; there are numerous ways in which they are combating scams, of which this piece is just one.
I believe people in this thread are (deliberately or not) looking at this from a very narrow point of view and not seeing how (1) there is a risk that is mitigated by preventing gullible users from installing malware through sideloading, (2) Google has reconsidered this solution after hearing community feedback and (3) Google uses numerous mechanisms to eliminate bad actors from the Play store.
To touch on the last one, it seems many of those mechanisms are not done transparently as I’ve seen threads on /r/AndroidDev back before I left Reddit about individuals being lifetime banned even by association to a scammer.
At the risk of sounding insincere—such is the nature of an online discussion forum—I’d like to tap into the ways you see the safety and security of the Play store to be deficient. How are phishing attempts successful there? In the articles I’ve read about phishing through fake apps, they all went through the route of sideloading. One example was to get “special features” in WhatsApp by downloading an APK, and another was to enable developer mode to install an antivirus APK because “the device was infected.” While I found articles describing imposter apps, searching for those apps on Google Play didn’t surface any of them, so it seems from my spot checks that it’s working.
To me, this entire discussion is quite conflicting, because on one hand, we all recognize the risk of malware, but at the same time the community is furious about whatever Google attempts to do about it.
Call me naive, but my family and I are very content with our Android phones and have no qualms with the way Google Play functions today. I remain confused about why this comment section is so mad.
- Comment on Breaking: Google is easing up on Android's new sideloading restrictions! 2 weeks ago:
The fee is 15% below the first $1M of revenue and it should go without saying that app developers only pay that fee for paid apps, in-app purchases or digital subscriptions. It’s very unlikely that a scam app would be paid, or work off a subscription, and if those phishing ads are doing their conversions, you’ll never see the user again.
I doubt Google’s making more than a few cents off each of these scam apps.
- Comment on Breaking: Google is easing up on Android's new sideloading restrictions! 2 weeks ago:
I would understand the outrage if Google didn’t stick to their word, but unless I’ve missed something, they’ve not, have they? Are we now protesting that they reversed their decision? Wasn’t this what we wanted?
- Comment on Breaking: Google is easing up on Android's new sideloading restrictions! 2 weeks ago:
I genuinely believe that it was motivated by the desire to deter scammers. What leads you to believe it’s not? There are many gullible people out there who will follow, precisely as you pointed out, phishing links that encourage them to sideload an unverified app.
No system is perfect, and I also believe that Google Play does a fair job of removing malicious apps.
I’m sorry to try to bring some nuance into this thread as I know that discourse isn’t welcome on Lemmy, but I’m just trying to wrap my head around the outrage. Providing a way to let experienced users continue to sideload apps while safeguarding the more gullible seems like a good idea and I still genuinely don’t understand what your preferred solution would be.
- Comment on Breaking: Google is easing up on Android's new sideloading restrictions! 2 weeks ago:
Wait, so Google listened to our feedback, and we’re still mad? What would a positive outcome have looked like?
- Comment on Tesla reintroduces 'Mad Max' Full Self-Driving mode that breaks speed limits 4 weeks ago:
As somebody who has a more basic car with just adaptive cruise control, the peace of mind makes driving less exhausting. I think there’s a considerable number of accidents caused by driver fatigue, such as rear-ending due to reduced reaction speed. A simple driver assistance technology like adaptive cruise control can prevent an accident like that, and advanced front collision warnings can stop cars like mine from speeds up to 100 km/h.
- Comment on Huge internet outage live blog: Amazon, Disney+, Hulu, HBO Max and more experiencing issues 5 weeks ago:
Why do these companies still sign with AWS? Didn’t they learn from the last two major outages in us-east? To say nothing of the deceptive business practices to obfuscate service utilization to overcharge businesses?
- Comment on Tesla reintroduces 'Mad Max' Full Self-Driving mode that breaks speed limits 5 weeks ago:
I think there’s a distinction to make between driver assistance technologies and how drivers become reliant on automation. Because otherwise, should we not have automatic transmission, either?
- Comment on Is the AI Conveyor Belt of Capital About to Stop? 1 month ago:
So you care a little bit about the clickbait headline? What an odd way of expressing that.
- Comment on AI Coding Is Massively Overhyped, Report Finds 1 month ago:
I don’t think it’s meant to be a conclusion. The article serves as a recap of several reports and studies about the effectivity of LLMs with coding, and the final quote from Bain & Company was a counterpoint to the previous ones asserting that productivity gains are minimal at best, but also that measuring productivity is a grey area.
- Comment on Pope Leo XIV dislikes AI, won’t authorise creation of AI Pope—"If we automate the whole world and only a few people have the means with which to more than just survive"~ there’s a big problem 2 months ago:
I’ve no interest in debating your opinion, forgive me for not entertaining it. Perhaps you’ve not recalled your past interactions accurately, and my only goal here is to correct the misinformation written in this thread.
If you’re instead looking for some sources, I’ve performed a rudimentary search on interpreting paragraph 64:
- Comment on Pope Leo XIV dislikes AI, won’t authorise creation of AI Pope—"If we automate the whole world and only a few people have the means with which to more than just survive"~ there’s a big problem 2 months ago:
That is not the full paragraph. It reads:
“If it is not practicable or appropriate to seek consent, and in exceptional cases where a patient has refused consent, disclosing personal information may be justified in the public interest if failure to do so may expose others to a risk of death or serious harm. The benefits to an individual or to society of the disclosure must outweigh both the patient’s and the public interest in keeping the information confidential.”
Let’s not forget that you had previously stated:
FYI a dokter/psychiatrist [sic] is just as banned from exposing a confessed murder or rapist,
From this UK source, doctors are explicitly exempt from violating doctor-patient confidentiality in the aforementioned case. This directly contradicts your statement.
I’m eager to read your referenced citations from the individuals you’ve interviewed in other regions where doctors would be banned in such cases.
- Comment on Pope Leo XIV dislikes AI, won’t authorise creation of AI Pope—"If we automate the whole world and only a few people have the means with which to more than just survive"~ there’s a big problem 2 months ago:
Doctor patient confidentiality does not override the public interest.
Have we resorted to stating overt lies now? The most basic internet search will provide you with reliable sources that show this absurd statement is untrue.
- Comment on Exactly Six Months Ago, the CEO of Anthropic Said That in Six Months AI Would Be Writing 90 Percent of Code 2 months ago:
As an engineer, it’s honestly heartbreaking to see how many executives have bought into this snake oil hook, line and sinker.
- Comment on Exactly Six Months Ago, the CEO of Anthropic Said That in Six Months AI Would Be Writing 90 Percent of Code 2 months ago:
In 2014 he promised 90% autonomous by 2015. That was over a decade ago and it’s still not close to that…
- Comment on Huawei unveils new trifold smartphone before Apple’s iPhone 17 reveal 2 months ago:
I saw a Pixel 10 Pro with 128 GB storage online today.
Kinda crazy (stupid) how people spend that much on a fucking TV.
- Comment on "Very dramatic shift" - Linus Tech Tips opens up about the channel's declining viewership 2 months ago:
This honestly doesn’t surprise me, because English proficiency in France is below that of Spain, Russia and even Italy, which says a lot.
- Comment on US Wants Judge to Break Up Google, Force Sale of Chrome: Here's What to Know 2 months ago:
It’s the same thing with the Linux kernel
It’s funny you should mention this, because Google has needed to adapt this for mobile and are already open source. If the opportunity existed for a “free” and open source version of Android to be embraced by consumers, there are many such options today, like GrapheneOS (or even forking AOSP, for that matter).
My concern is that if the major contributor to that steps out, the volunteer community will need to substantially step up.
Consumer devices ship with proprietary software which is licensed all the time
The reason I called out your example of Red Hat is to illustrate how enterprise is financing a free consumer experience.
With a very limited enterprise market, it’s not realistic to expect this to apply to an almost exclusively consumer product.
So there are two options. Either we don’t have an open source Android and in addition to the license cost of GMS, OEMs would have to license the OS itself. The alternative is that OEMs shoulder the development cost of their own fork of AOSP, which would simply be passed on to consumers. Either way, this would drive up the price of devices.
I’m not sure why you’re speaking in hypotheticals about what Android could be if it had license fees, as it’s readily available in open source under the Apache license today and, despite that, steadily losing market share.
- Comment on US Wants Judge to Break Up Google, Force Sale of Chrome: Here's What to Know 2 months ago:
Android is already largely open source. Yet it takes a massive investment from Google to continue developing it and curate the app store with it.
I’m genuinely struggling to envision how we move from the current situation to a somehow better but more fragmented ecosystem that doesn’t negatively affect consumer experiences. Whichever way I’ve approached it, it plays in the favor of one company in particular who already has a leading market share in the US, and I truly don’t see how that would be better.
- Comment on US Wants Judge to Break Up Google, Force Sale of Chrome: Here's What to Know 2 months ago:
If you’re referring to Google Play itself, it’s my interpretation that this is exactly what needs to be uncoupled that the proponents of separating Android from Google are arguing.
- Comment on US Wants Judge to Break Up Google, Force Sale of Chrome: Here's What to Know 2 months ago:
The primary ways in which the Mozilla Foundation earns money is through search partnerships, donations and grants. Guess who is the major contributor.
As for Red Hat, this comes down to subscriptions or enterprise offerings, neither which really apply to a consumer OS unless you’re willing to pay a subscription fee out of pocket. I doubt there will be much to be earned from offering consulting or training, either, unless they make Android exceedingly confusing to use.
The only companies that would pay for Android are OEMs who are already making thin margins, and effectively it’d drive the price of non-iPhones up. The alternative is that OEMs take the Huawei option and fork AAOS and develop it at their own expense.
- Comment on US Wants Judge to Break Up Google, Force Sale of Chrome: Here's What to Know 2 months ago:
What do you mean by “get”? Who will be funding the creation of all these OSes? The phone margins are already razor thin.
- Comment on US Wants Judge to Break Up Google, Force Sale of Chrome: Here's What to Know 2 months ago:
Android would be unprofitable and unsustainable in isolation. So that would leave each OEM to build their own thing, but to make a long story short, everybody would just get an iPhone. So then I wonder, if making such a ruling would create the void for a monopoly, what’s the sense?
- Comment on The Browser Wasn’t Enough, Google Wants To Control All Your Software 2 months ago:
Apple requires developers to go through a Notarization process, much in the same way that Google intends to introduce restrictions to sideloading on Android. How is this different?
- Comment on The Browser Wasn’t Enough, Google Wants To Control All Your Software 2 months ago:
Interesting perspective. So the suggestion is to redirect our blame away from our elected representatives or even from electing representatives that run in a campaign that aligns with our priorities.
- Comment on The Browser Wasn’t Enough, Google Wants To Control All Your Software 2 months ago:
Yet Apple has been able to profit from their walled garden for decades now. Doesn’t that set a precedent that it’s okay? I honestly don’t blame Google for going this route—it’s inaction from our policymakers that has created the space for abuse.