4 ms·

If it was a normal in-app payment it would go through Google. Where it could be tracked, identified as fraud, and stopped.

by ceph_ 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
martin_a 7y ago
You misspelled "Where it benefits Google, no matter whether it's fraud or not".
- TomMarius 7y ago
  I am okay with that. No one is forcing anyone to use the Google service.
  - z3t4 7y ago
    You are forced to use either Apple or Android or a Windows PC to acces many services that are essential to modern life. Android would probably be the cheapest option. So if you do not want to use Google services you would have to pay premium. For many people it is not an option.
    - TomMarius 7y ago
      I am not and I am not using neither Apple, Android (I am using the FOSS version, I guess that does not count as Android in this case) nor Windows and I am not missing anything, and I'm not frugal in this sense (most of my friends consider me a guy living in the future). And I am not paying premiums. I simply prefer web apps over native apps, it's a breeze with PWAs.
      - z3t4 7y ago
        All government services where I live require Windows/Android or Apple. For some time I used Android in a VM for tax declaration etc, but the developers first banned the OS build name, so I changed the build name :P But then they found some way to figure out that I was using a VM. My hope is in PWA's, but the problem with PWA's (it's a feature really) is that it's harder to fingerprint and spy on the user. Also meaning it's harder to catch abuse like identity theft. I know there are ongoing work on Web ID standards where you can have a cheap second factor device as key. So it looks promising. But then there are the platforms, what incentive do they have, (more then empowering their users and developers), to actually enable a layer like web browsers that circumvent their monopoly status?

4 ms·

If it was a normal in-app payment it would go through Google. Where it could be tracked, identified as fraud, and stopped.

by ceph_ 7y ago

If it was a normal in-app payment it would go through Google. Where it could be tracked, identified as fraud, and stopped.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
martin_a 7y ago
You misspelled "Where it benefits Google, no matter whether it's fraud or not".
- TomMarius 7y ago
  I am okay with that. No one is forcing anyone to use the Google service.
  - z3t4 7y ago
    You are forced to use either Apple or Android or a Windows PC to acces many services that are essential to modern life. Android would probably be the cheapest option. So if you do not want to use Google services you would have to pay premium. For many people it is not an option.
    - TomMarius 7y ago
      I am not and I am not using neither Apple, Android (I am using the FOSS version, I guess that does not count as Android in this case) nor Windows and I am not missing anything, and I'm not frugal in this sense (most of my friends consider me a guy living in the future). And I am not paying premiums. I simply prefer web apps over native apps, it's a breeze with PWAs.
      - z3t4 7y ago
        All government services where I live require Windows/Android or Apple. For some time I used Android in a VM for tax declaration etc, but the developers first banned the OS build name, so I changed the build name :P But then they found some way to figure out that I was using a VM. My hope is in PWA's, but the problem with PWA's (it's a feature really) is that it's harder to fingerprint and spy on the user. Also meaning it's harder to catch abuse like identity theft. I know there are ongoing work on Web ID standards where you can have a cheap second factor device as key. So it looks promising. But then there are the platforms, what incentive do they have, (more then empowering their users and developers), to actually enable a layer like web browsers that circumvent their monopoly status?