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.
@wide_eyed_stupid @Gsus4
They’re “sideloading” our vocabulary@wide_eyed_stupid @Gsus4 “You will own nothing, and if you don’t like it you can talk to the security cyberdog that has you in its sights.”
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.
Fair, it’s not a new term. I was born in the 80’ies, I’m familiar with the concept.
However, it’s now being used with new bullshit meaning (i.e. going outside the Google/Apple app and their own offered selection), and media are normalizing this use.
so you’re saying it is the wrong word, because most apks are downloaded from the internet on-device. That is not a local transfer
It is still the same installation method, directly installing the .apk file, from way back when the term for Android usage was defined. So, kinda, but also kinda not. Also, if you do use ADB to do the install from a PC, the command is “ADB sideload filename” which will do the transfer and installation to the memory directly. Then it truly is sideloading as defined.
Android doesn’t use ROMs (Read-only Memory) any more either, because the filesystems are now writable. But Lineage etc are still called custom ROMs, because the end result hasn’t changed.
@JohnEdwa @wide_eyed_stupid indeed. but it takes only a single incendiarily indignant but factually wrong mastodon post to force anyone left who’s still reading wikipedia to clarify forever, because the OP is being parroted until hell freezes over.
@JohnEdwa @wide_eyed_stupid the correct take would be “i should be free to sideload software to my devices in any way i please”.
@lritter @JohnEdwa @wide_eyed_stupid unfortunately the term has been anti-reclaimed by corpos for use to imply it’s outside the norm to have control over what runs on your own device
@zaire @wide_eyed_stupid @JohnEdwa it’s our term. just like the sparkles emoji. they can’t claim anything. it’s all ours. they can go to hell.
I’m sure there’s something in the EULA about how it’s actually their device and we are just licensing it, just like software. I hate this tech feudalism so much.
You know, it’s very possible, because I’ve never actually read an entire EULA, I don’t think.
@wide_eyed_stupid @arararagi I will never read the TOS and if it says I can’t use the machine I own as I see fit, they can shove the EULA and the DMCA it rode in on up their ass sideways.
“I have read and agree to the Terms” is the biggest lie on the web. Together, we can fix that.
This framing still sucks. Google is blocking apps THEY don’t approve on YOUR phone.
Agreed. But one climb down means potentially more, as needed. 🤞🏻
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 bet you less than 1% of users are even aware and of that less than .1% can’t figure out what they need.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I mean you are right; however, the point about security can go both ways.
Not worried about security, it’s more that I can’t have two of the same card at the same time
I share a card with a family member. They have the physical one as it belongs to them, I use it on my phone
You can’t just get an extra card for the account? My bank does offer this, and it’s how my parents have always shared their account.
Sadly, I can’t. It’s not a legally shared account, and part of a specific legislation in my country (France). Basically, it’s tied to an account that can be used exclusively to purchase food at half the price during work days
When it’s more convenient (ex: I’m already outside), I buy food for my family using their card and bring it back to them on my way home
It’s unfortunately one of the things that make me stay on stock iOS rather than Graphene, as I prefer stock iOS to stock Android in terms of looks, comfort, and privacy
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.
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?
Until Pay, there was Wallet. The original Wallet, not the current one.
Classic Google.
I remember wallet only working consistently at McDonald’s.
For most of early wallets existence it did only work McDonald’s lol
Credit card in your phone case, use your banks’ website, 95+% of people right there.
Most banks don’t allow payment through their apps anymore
This also doesn’t work for shared cards under one person’s name, which is my main use for this
remember when people were actually excited about new android releases because they were weird and consumer friendly?
Meanwhile the Play Store is full of scams. This isn’t about safety, it making sure they get a cut from the scam apps.
It’s a trashpile. If I need an app, I search ‘site:reddit android app x’ or look in f-droid
So about those linux phones…
Aaaaaaany day now… guys…?
(I have a pinephone and no, it is absolutely nowhere near ready)
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
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.
No NA sales :(
Perfect time for the Chinese to setup a shell company in Mexico that sells smartphones & devices with AOSP-android-based OS to the US. It’ll sell like hot cakes.
It’ll sell like hot cakes.
Nope… lot of apps won’t run.
Nobody is buying a phone without Google Play Certification.
Not to mention, some carriers like ATT have a weird whitelist thing.
Also, there might be compatibility issues with provisioning the SIM, since I just had an issue with LineageOS breaking data connection, but restoring factory rom fixes it, then I flash Lineage again and it broke again, so yeah… I expect similar issues with a “Non- Google Play Certified” device.
Biggest thing is: Netflix Widewine defaults back to L3 instead of L1 requited for HD stuff
Before you say “just pirate”, most people don’t know how to do that. Also somethings can’t even get pirated since its so niche.
Weird that they want to do all the verification themselves and not just allow certificate signing using verified CAs. Oh well it’s not weird because we all know Google does this to fight back against third party stores and to get developers back to their shitty one and of course to better track them.
I’m guessing what you’re suggesting is that Google’s proposal is the same as requiring all packages be signed and accompanied by an Extended Validation or Oragnisation Validation X.509 certificate.
While that would technically work, the problem with using the existing PKI is that it’s still very expensive to get EV/OV certificates. And the most common of these certs (those for TLS purposes) will soon only last 47 days which is, to put it mildly, would be a pain in the ass to use for package-signing.
My project uses a free one from SignPath. They offer this for opensource projects and require a verifiable GitHub build process. It’s not EV certs but it’s good enough and free.
A “concession” to use your phone, and you need to give your address, phone number, and ID. Fuck off.
edit: this is an article from November, its not something new…
bullshit! if this is actually what the “new” rule is, the exact same thing was already part of their unacceptable original plans.
To accommodate educational and noncommercial development, Google will introduce a new limited developer account type aimed at students and hobbyists. These accounts will not undergo full identity verification but will instead allow app installations on a restricted number of registered devices.
no to any kind of accounts, to any kind of developer registration, and any kind of install limits! its none of google’s business what apps people install outside their store, and so they shouldn’t be able to enforce a global installation limit for any apps!
“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.
Do you use Fdroid or simply get apks online, like we all used to before these walled gardens?
Neither ! I use Obtainium, which allows you to get apps directly from the source, with the convenience of a normal app store for updating !
I usually look for apps on droid-ify, which is an alternative front end to f-droid, then whenever possible I copy the link of the source repo and install via Obtainium ; when I can’t I install the f-droid version via Obtainium as well (as a result, I have 0 apps installed by droid-ify, I only use it for search)
When I need an App Store exclusive app, I install it via Aurora Store (which downloads apps via shared anonymous accounts)
The only thing this system can’t get around is paid apps from the App Store. I have exactly one : Cookie Clicker. (I like the game in general so I paid to support the dev)
I use fdroid whenever possible, but I do use Google Play for most everything else. I do have a few apps that I install via APK, but built-in updaters are so uncommon on Android apps that it’s kind of a pain to maintain.
Obtainium can solve that. It will check websites for updates and then download the new apk and install it. I use it more than fdroid now, can get apk straight from the developers github repo usually.
Interesting, I’ll have to play around with that.
I’m not worried about sideloading because I use GrapheneOS, but I’m worried that development for various apps might stop…
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.
Billionaires doing what a billionaire does: feign a reason to kneecap a service, force complaints about its ineffectiveness, then use that as an excuse to dismantle it entirely. I am so tired of this.
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
