Readit News logoReadit News
Posted by u/nativeforks 4 months ago
Petition to stop Google from restricting sideloading and FOSS apps
As Google will allow only apps from verified developers to be installed on Android (previous discussion): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45017028

A developer started a petition to stop Google from limiting app installation on Android devices unless developers provide personal identity documents.

Even though Google has not revoked similar controversial policies in the past, we do our best as much as we can. This change particularly threatens the freedom to build, share, and use software without giving away sensitive personal information. It affects independent developers, FOSS contributors, and even regular users who want to install apps outside of Google Play.

``Just imagine giving sensitive personal, government-issued ID to a corporation to install an app outside Google Play``

Let’s stand together to protect our freedom to create and use software without handing over personal information to a corporation. Every signature, share, and voice counts here

Support the petition here: https://chng.it/MsHzSXtJnw

JumpCrisscross · 4 months ago
These online petitions are worse than useless. They don’t do anything because they fail to communicate either conviction to a cause or the relevance of the signers. And they may take someone who would otherwise do something useful, like call their elected or participate in public comment, and make them complacent.

An open letter from the lead developers and decision makers of top-rated apps in the Play Store would be useful. But that takes work, unlike an online petition.

david_allison · 4 months ago
Hi, developer of a top-rated app in the Play Store [AnkiDroid].

What do I need to do to make a difference, and how much time will this take?

[My elected officials listen, what's the path? Legislation?]

JumpCrisscross · 4 months ago
> What do I need to do to make a difference, and how much time will this take?

EU or US?

> what's the path? Legislation?

Send them a letter explaining why this is bad for you. Keep it strictly factual and ideally concise. Copy Google’s legal [1] and any relevant digital or markets regulators. (If in the US, don’t forget your state regulators.)

Wait two weeks and then call the elected. Make sure they’re aware, and talk through your options. Send a letter thanking them for the call, incorporating any new information and actions they said they would take, and copy all of the previous parties again.

More work: reach out to other top developers and organise an open letter. This will be hard because everyone wants to include their pet issue and everyone will fight over scope and language.

[1] https://support.google.com/faqs/answer/6151275?hl=en

username332211 · 4 months ago
You can't do anything with respect to legislators. In their eyes, your privacy and the consumer's rights are less important than some grandma, who lost a large sum of money by installing malware after ignoring multiple warnings.

If you want to make a difference, try to communicate with someone from OEM companies. Google is making their phones inferior and they'll loose money and market share because of it.

After this change, "I can install NewPipe and Ad blockers" will become a major selling point for Chinese phones among large and profitable segments of the population. And that high-end manufacturers might as well give up and let Apple take that part of the market. If OEMs can be made to understand that, that's going to be the end of this initiative.

limagnolia · 4 months ago
JumpCrisscross's reply was really good, and I would like to add additionally that US congress representatives and senators usually maintain local offices in cities in their constituency, and a visit to these offices (usually you can make an appointment by calling them) to discuss issues in person is a very powerful way to be heard. If you aren't in the US, you'll need to find out if your government has anything similar.
dmix · 4 months ago
They are placebos to make people feel better. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism

Deleted Comment

janice1999 · 4 months ago
Petitioning EU lawmakers would be better. American control of European data is already a bit issue at the moment in the face of US threats over Digital taxes and Microsoft being used to punish ICJ members.
graemep · 4 months ago
EU (and the rest of Europe) are more concerned with controlling their own populations than keeping their data safe from the US. They are very much pro-big business dominance on the internet BECAUSE it makes it easier for them to regulate.

A lot of governments want to use American AI systems to run things to cut costs.

jeroenhd · 4 months ago
Honestly, I'll be surprised if this plan doesn't break the DMA/DSA already.

Someone will need to collect the necessary resources to bring the fight to the courts, though.

sorrythanks · 4 months ago
There's also a form here for direct feedback on this topic to Google that may or may not be worth filling out:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfN3UQeNspQsZCO2ITk...

Speedy218 · 4 months ago
It would be nice if Google cared, but sadly they're more interested in how this will make them more money and how seamlessly they can integrate it with existing verified developers. We as the users are quite frankly at the bottom of their shoes for lack of a better word, the only way to change anything is to go offensive at their brand.
_joel · 4 months ago
Wasn't this fairly successful at rasing the profile of the issue? https://www.stopkillinggames.com/
JumpCrisscross · 4 months ago
Yes. Not a rando online petition: “we have succesfully escalated complaints on this problem to consumer agencies in France, Germany, and Australia, and have brought forth petitions for new law on this problem to various countries.”

Petitions from verified voters are powerful. Triply so if done in person, because the infrastructure that can collect signatures in person can also e.g. back a primary challenge or plebiscite.

immibis · 4 months ago
Has legislation been created as a result of that awareness?

And the vast majority of their awareness actually came from a failed counter-campaign by the opposition.

JanisErdmanis · 4 months ago
Such petiotions also fail to communicate legitimacy in a sense that authentic members have signed the petitition. Hence it can also be used adversely to steer the public opinion (although unlikely for the given situation).
egorfine · 4 months ago
Please bear in mind that Google was perfectly aware how much negative feedback they will receive from developers and they are completely and fully prepared for it. In other words, this decision was made with full awareness that developers and "screeching voices of minority" won't like it.
kotaKat · 4 months ago
Yep. In the announcement, they already got full green light approval from various governments basically saying this was a great idea and the clear path ahead.

> …with Indonesia’s Ministry of Communications and Digital Affairs praising it for providing a “balanced approach” that protects users while keeping Android open.

> …Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society sees it as a “positive and proactive measure” that aligns with their national digital safety policies.

> In Brazil, the Brazilian Federation of Banks (FEBRABAN) sees it as a “significant advancement in protecting users and encouraging accountability.”

username332211 · 4 months ago
The fact that they haven't cited any endorsement from a first-world organization or government is interesting.

I'd be curious to know, if it was because they never asked for one or because they never got one?

danillonunes · 4 months ago
FEBRABAN is an association that represents the banks at the federal level, but it's not a government entity.
nashashmi · 4 months ago
Did the US government not give endorsement?
jerf · 4 months ago
They can still miscalculate the intensity of the backlash or the willingness of people to do something about it. Many such stories. "The enemy has a plan so let's do nothing" is a great way to get consistently rolled in the world. As the saying goes, everyone has a plan until they are punched in the face; dishing out the occasional (and in this case fully metaphorical) punch in the face is not a hopeless endeavor.

(I agree with some other threads that merely signing a random petition is not a punch to the face. That's just whining. Systematic and organized, perhaps, but just whining.)

AnonymousPlanet · 4 months ago
The nerds are the ones who pave the way for technology, enabling people around them to adapt more easily to it. They find new paths into the undiscovered land that then get either shut down or commercially exploited. Companies like Google have piggybacked on this volunteer work.

I have the feeling that these companies don't need nerds anymore. Who needs pioneers if everything is paved and regulated?

Dead Comment

SiempreViernes · 4 months ago
Do you have evidence that they have accurate estimates of the potential for backlash? It is not that uncommon that people in power take decisions without thinking them though properly
egorfine · 4 months ago
I've got no evidence that they have an estimation of the volume or scale of the feedback.

But I reckon we can all make an educated guess that they did anticipate negative feedback.

tliltocatl · 4 months ago
You might be right, but didn't same thing applied to Web Environment Integrity stuff, that they ended up stepping back on (for how short of a time stretch is another story)?
egorfine · 4 months ago
First, web environment integrity was about the web as a whole, not about something that is completely owned and under their control. Second, they will not stop trying. It was not their first approach and it won't be the last.

So, I believe that if they decided this is the path they want to take - they will find one way or another. It's not that resistance is futile (it's not!) but I believe that petitions are not a good tool for the case.

creatonez · 4 months ago
What an excellent reason to not mobilize on this issue...

...No. Giving them the loud protest they deserve is the bare minimum

egorfine · 4 months ago
Well... initially I would like to agree with you. When company does a dumb thing they may find out that users are not happy with the choice and then retract.

But in this particular case, they knew exactly and in advance that developers won't like the change, hence why I believe that in this particular case whining won't dent a thing.

pbhjpbhj · 4 months ago
I mean, who is going to stop them, USA doesn't have a functioning government any more -- for large corporations just pay Trump a bribe (eg a "settlement" for a court case; or a very expensive meal ticket) and do what you like.

Google pay fealty to Trump, who is going in to bat for consumers over this when they won't even protect the constitution or rule of law?

Dead Comment

babban010 · 3 months ago
The only reason one uses android is cos of the side loading feature. Google is digging its own grave. Don't try it.
rep_lodsb · 4 months ago
"Almost completely boiled frog petitions against raising the water temperature another degree"

It's great to see that some more people who were previously complacent are outraged about this move. But let's look back a bit:

In the early 1990s, Linus Torvalds started writing an OS kernel for 386-class PCs. He didn't need the approval of some corporation to allow him to run code on his own machine, or distribute it for others to run on theirs. The code didn't have to run as an "app" in some restricted sandbox under Microsoft's OS (not that back then, DOS or Windows were even in any way locked down the way modern operating systems are). Documentation for all the "standard" hardware like video, keyboard, hard disks, etc. was openly available, so it didn't have to rely on proprietary drivers.

This is how it was at one time, and what should have remained the standard today, but instead it's turned into some utopian dream that those who grew up with "smart" devices can't even conceive as possible anymore.

Google has taken what became of this code, and turned it into an "open" system that is pretty much designed to track every aspect of people's lives in order to more effectively target them with psychological manipulation, which is what advertisements really are. And you're not really getting "free stuff" in return for this invasion either, since pretty much everything you buy includes a hidden "tax" that goes to support this massive industry.

"A supercomputer in everyone's pocket"? Yes, but it's not yours, nor can you even know what it does. Even the source code that is available is millions of lines that you couldn't inspect in all your lifetime. Online 24/7, with GPS tracking your every move and a microphone that listens to what you say. Every URL you visit is logged. Your photos uploaded to "the cloud" and used to train AI.

The only solution is to no longer accept any of this, even if almost everyone else does. Even if it means giving up some convenience.

Google has to be destroyed.

kogasa240p · 4 months ago
>Google

Apple too, they're the ones who normalized smartphones.

danaris · 4 months ago
Apple showed the world that a smartphone that was enjoyable to use was possible.

I know it's hard to remember today, but in 2007, Apple was still the perennially-"beleaguered" underdog whose only big success story in marketshare terms was the iPod.

If the public had not loved the iPhone, it never could have "normalized" anything.

There are definitely aspects of the iPhone that it is fair to criticize Apple for. The rest of the world's wholesale embrace of its design—to the point of slavishly copying it, for several manufacturers at different points in time—can only be blamed on their lack of imagination and willingness to take risks, and on the public's unwillingness to give up the benefits of the iPhone just to get the much-less-obvious benefits of something more "open" or different.

goda90 · 4 months ago
I think the biggest impact we can have, besides getting government regulation involved, is building the market share of an alternative.
rchaud · 4 months ago
Yes. A decision like this creates the impetus to move to alternatives like Jolla OS that have an Android-compatible layer.

20 years in, the so-called "smartphone" duopoly have jointly converged towards a "dumb terminal" strategy, where almost nothing can be done without cloud-based authentication from a centralized third party. And this was the case prior to the AI horse manure they're baking into the OS.

I use the Fossify forks of Simple Mobile Tools apps (Gallery, File Manager, Calculator) because these can be installed via APK files and just be left alone. My Google Calculator app on the other hand seems to want to download new updates every single month.

elric · 4 months ago
That, and staying away from anything that funnels money to Google.
monegator · 4 months ago
And what alternative would that be? iOS? hah. Hardware and vendor lock in.

AOSP / Graphene, or the equivalent of linux on a smartphone would be a better chance, but first and foremost you need hardware support. Something is happening like eos, pinephone and the like but we are a long, long way toward that goal.

hofrogs · 4 months ago
By utilizing anti-user language like "sideloading" you are already submitting to their desire to own all hardware.
folkrav · 4 months ago
This. It’s nothing but corporate Newspeak for “installing software”.
bitwize · 4 months ago
"Installing software" is the cause of malware problems where it is allowed to take place indiscriminately. Restricting which software can be installed is pro-end-user.

Deleted Comment

bagol · 4 months ago
I just realized how powerless we are. The situation is almost unavoidable. Majority people will just accept this. They are unaware how restricted they are, thus they don't care.
gooob · 4 months ago
are there enough devs to make "non-certified" phones? also i wonder if you'll be able to disable the verification check similar to bootloader unlocking.
rchaud · 4 months ago
Non-certified phones won't be sold in Western markets. This whole scheme has one goal only, and that's to snuff out DRM-unfriendly third party apps like alternative Youtube clients, videogame emulators and P2P file sharing apps.
Speedy218 · 4 months ago
Sadly "non-certified" phones come at a big consequence, I wrote a big article on it on HN but I'll give you the summary, Google has added in "play integrity" into all certified phones which detects if your bootloader is unlocked or your phone is modified in some way, and apps can (and do) request this device verdict on your device to choose to deny you service. Bank apps, basically all NFC wallet apps like Google Wallet, and games do this, and it's a massive headache. Good apps also make this a server-side check meaning you cannot bypass this without leaking your phone's special hardware attestation key stored in 50 different layers of security in the actual CPU with tamper detection.
0xbadcafebee · 4 months ago
I am actually super exited about Google's decision. I only used Android because it was the least-worst option. I always hated how restrictive its OS is, and the Play Store, the locking-down of tethering, etc. But I never had enough reason to try a totally open-source smartphone. Until now.

I'm so excited that I might even jump back into open source development to make a new OS that isn't as bloated and slow as Android. There is a need for an OS that only gives you minimum capabilities, to run on cheaper, simpler, smaller devices. I would love to help make that a reality.

dreamcompiler · 4 months ago
Me too. The idea of not being forced to write apps in shitty languages like Java or shitty IDEs like Xcode makes me positively giddy.
Speedy218 · 4 months ago
Can't you write apps in C++ or something alike on android if you really wanted to?
em-bee · 4 months ago
whatever you build, it will need to be able to run android apps seamlessly. otherwise it's nonstarter for many users.