7 ms·

Don't forget that F-Droid is a thing, and Android still has at least that much freedom - to install your own software. Who would have thought 30 years ago some

Don't forget that F-Droid is a thing, and Android still has at least that much freedom - to install your own software. Who would have thought 30 years ago someone would be saying "People can run any code they want on their computer" as a shocking thing.

oji0hub 6y ago
Installing software outside of play store is technically possible, but if something contains enough hurdles, most people won't do it, which results in no users and a meaningless platform.
- imhoguy 6y ago
  It is not meaningless, but agreed not something for mass use yet. Similarly like 30-40 years ago with personal computing, now also geeks start the paradigm shift into privacy-aware computing.
  - corty 6y ago
    I guess at some point Google will close the F-Droid loophole in Android and only allow installations through the Playstore anymore. You know, for security reasons... winkwink Maybe the real reason will be pressure from the government to hurt the ones like Huawei a little more, maybe it will be the need to squeeze more money, or maybe the need for censorship because those evil alternative app-platforms allow whatever unwanted stuff.
    - brmgb 6y ago
      > I guess at some point Google will close the F-Droid loophole in Android and only allow installations through the Playstore anymore. Google standing in Europe is already really shaky. They keep taking fines after fines for abuse of their dominant position. That won't last forever. If they close the ability for other stores to exist, the best case scenario is the EU giving them a huge fine and forcing them to go back. Worst case is being force to split Android out of the main company. Google knows that which is why they will not do it.
      - suizi 6y ago
        Does Europe have the power to split Google? Or does that lie with U.S. regulators?
        imhoguy 6y ago
        Google is already split in EU, there are subsidiaries in various countries. Although parent company is in US. EU has no power to split US company, but can apply fines to localy registers subsidiaries when laws are breached.
- grishka 6y ago
  There aren't that many hurdles. 1. You download the apk 2. When you try to install it, it tells you it's from an unknown source and the installation was blocked to protect you 3. You tap "settings" and flip a switch to allow installing apps from your browser 4. You go back and tap "install". That's it. It's done. And you won't need to go to the settings the next time, it'll just work.
  - spians 6y ago
    These are still four more steps then what it takes to directly install from the Play Store. Most people would view any of these four steps as hurdle. > And you won't need to go to the settings the next time, it'll just work. You will still have to find the apk when there is an update, download it and confirm install. There are still three steps to update the apk compared to Play Store's one tap (or even zero clicks if automatic updates are on). Only "Allow installing from this source" step is removed when updating the app.
    - grishka 6y ago
      It's possible to build self-update functionality into an app, just like many apps do on desktop. An app can open that installation prompt to update itself.
      - anderspitman 6y ago
        Not on the latest versions of Android, unless you're only updating interpreted code like Python. You can no longer execute files that weren't packaged with the original APK.
        grishka 6y ago
        You can download an apk and launch the package installer activity to install it. In latest versions of Android, you'll need to serve the apk through a ContentProvider. I tested this myself, it works, even if the app is updating itself. But I think you can actually still load arbitrary dex files using a ClassLoader? I thought that the update was only affecting JNI libraries. I remember reading how they wanted for any and all executable code to come from a signed package. Even then, if you're determined enough, you can load arbitrary native code by allocating some rwx memory pages and copying it in there ;)
- akvadrako 6y ago
  Only if your users are really lazy. It's certainly easier to install Element from an Apk then it is to set element up from then on.
  - oji0hub 6y ago
    That's almost all people in practice.
- poisonborz 6y ago
  The same was said of purchasing stock options.
- herewegoagain2 6y ago
  The other aspect is that Google is now jeopardizing many people who now enable "other sources", making them more susceptible to malware. (Not saying you shouldn't enable "other sources", but many people don't understand what they are doing).
notassigned 6y ago
Thanks for sharing F-Droid. Don't know how I've missed this so far
olah_1 6y ago
F-Droid bans apps for “hate speech” too[1]. Any mastodon app that refused to blacklist Gab got banned from F-Droid or something like that. It is the perfect example of why I don’t even bother with federated projects. It’s just “wouldn’t it be great if _I_ were in charge?” If that’s the situation, I’d rather Big Tech be in charge because at least they have some name recognition and hierarchy for decision making. Nobody cares if pizza-witches wrongfully broke terms. With Twitter at least peoples’ ears perk up. In other words, there’s no rules in the alley. But there are rules in the town square. [1]: https://reclaimthenet.org/f-droid-bans-gab-app/ https://reclaimthenet.org/f-droid-bans-gab-app/
- Macha 6y ago
  This is mostly untrue. There was no requirement to blacklist gab. Mastodon clients on f-droid are allowed let users use Gab. What f-droid does not allow is apps preconfigured to connect to Gab, or who's primary purpose is to connect to Gab. There was even a petition to have fdroid remove an app (fedilab) that had a blacklist to disallow Gab then removed it, claiming that removing Gab from the blacklist was specifically endorsing it, and there were some people who tried to claiming that not apps that were not blacklisting Gab when other apps did meant those apps primary purpose was to connect to Gab, but f-droid weren't having it: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/issues/1736 https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/issues/1736. However, they did consider an app that was a straight fork tracking another with the only change being the removal of a blacklist to be disallowed.
  - Kinrany 6y ago
    Could you rephrase the fourth paragraph?
    - Macha 6y ago
      fedilab was allowed despite removing a blacklist. This was because not having a blacklist was not the app's sole distinction from other mastodon apps (it had a majorly different UI), so its purpose was determined to be more than just accessing Gab. However, some fdroid users asked for its removal. They felt removing the blacklist feature, which had previously only blocked gab, was itself an endorsement of Gab and indicated the app's purpose was to access Gab since the other available mastodon app (Tusky) still had a blacklist. fdroid did not agree and fedilab is still available. OpenTusky was not allowed as it was literally Tusky with the server blacklist removed, created in response to Tusky blocking Gab. It also advertised this in the app description, so fdroid judged it to be primarily for accessing gab and removed it.
dominotw 6y ago
I use the app to chat with my mom. My mom is not going to install F-Droid or whatever. This comment reminds me of the famous dropbox comment on HN.
- NullPrefix 6y ago
  Care to share the famous comment for those not in the know?
  - _huayra_ 6y ago
    iirc, the quote s/he's referring to is approximately "Dropbox won't ever take off because it's just glorified rsync and everyone can already do that", i.e. "everyone" can rsync
  - dgellow 6y ago
    See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863
- unethical_ban 6y ago
  There was a time when people did click a download link. Installing APKs are easier than fiddling with most app settings. Think of how Fortnite was distributed via APK when Epic was big enough to tell people how to do it. I don't deny the utility of app stores. My point was about the freedom of platform at a capability level.

oji0hub 6y ago

Installing software outside of play store is technically possible, but if something contains enough hurdles, most people won't do it, which results in no users and a meaningless platform.

imhoguy 6y ago
It is not meaningless, but agreed not something for mass use yet. Similarly like 30-40 years ago with personal computing, now also geeks start the paradigm shift into privacy-aware computing.
- corty 6y ago
  I guess at some point Google will close the F-Droid loophole in Android and only allow installations through the Playstore anymore. You know, for security reasons... winkwink Maybe the real reason will be pressure from the government to hurt the ones like Huawei a little more, maybe it will be the need to squeeze more money, or maybe the need for censorship because those evil alternative app-platforms allow whatever unwanted stuff.
  - brmgb 6y ago
    > I guess at some point Google will close the F-Droid loophole in Android and only allow installations through the Playstore anymore. Google standing in Europe is already really shaky. They keep taking fines after fines for abuse of their dominant position. That won't last forever. If they close the ability for other stores to exist, the best case scenario is the EU giving them a huge fine and forcing them to go back. Worst case is being force to split Android out of the main company. Google knows that which is why they will not do it.
    - suizi 6y ago
      Does Europe have the power to split Google? Or does that lie with U.S. regulators?
      - imhoguy 6y ago
        Google is already split in EU, there are subsidiaries in various countries. Although parent company is in US. EU has no power to split US company, but can apply fines to localy registers subsidiaries when laws are breached.
grishka 6y ago
There aren't that many hurdles. 1. You download the apk 2. When you try to install it, it tells you it's from an unknown source and the installation was blocked to protect you 3. You tap "settings" and flip a switch to allow installing apps from your browser 4. You go back and tap "install". That's it. It's done. And you won't need to go to the settings the next time, it'll just work.
- spians 6y ago
  These are still four more steps then what it takes to directly install from the Play Store. Most people would view any of these four steps as hurdle. > And you won't need to go to the settings the next time, it'll just work. You will still have to find the apk when there is an update, download it and confirm install. There are still three steps to update the apk compared to Play Store's one tap (or even zero clicks if automatic updates are on). Only "Allow installing from this source" step is removed when updating the app.
  - grishka 6y ago
    It's possible to build self-update functionality into an app, just like many apps do on desktop. An app can open that installation prompt to update itself.
    - anderspitman 6y ago
      Not on the latest versions of Android, unless you're only updating interpreted code like Python. You can no longer execute files that weren't packaged with the original APK.
      - grishka 6y ago
        You can download an apk and launch the package installer activity to install it. In latest versions of Android, you'll need to serve the apk through a ContentProvider. I tested this myself, it works, even if the app is updating itself. But I think you can actually still load arbitrary dex files using a ClassLoader? I thought that the update was only affecting JNI libraries. I remember reading how they wanted for any and all executable code to come from a signed package. Even then, if you're determined enough, you can load arbitrary native code by allocating some rwx memory pages and copying it in there ;)
akvadrako 6y ago
Only if your users are really lazy. It's certainly easier to install Element from an Apk then it is to set element up from then on.
- oji0hub 6y ago
  That's almost all people in practice.
poisonborz 6y ago
The same was said of purchasing stock options.
herewegoagain2 6y ago
The other aspect is that Google is now jeopardizing many people who now enable "other sources", making them more susceptible to malware. (Not saying you shouldn't enable "other sources", but many people don't understand what they are doing).

notassigned 6y ago

Thanks for sharing F-Droid. Don't know how I've missed this so far

olah_1 6y ago

F-Droid bans apps for “hate speech” too[1]. Any mastodon app that refused to blacklist Gab got banned from F-Droid or something like that. It is the perfect example of why I don’t even bother with federated projects. It’s just “wouldn’t it be great if _I_ were in charge?” If that’s the situation, I’d rather Big Tech be in charge because at least they have some name recognition and hierarchy for decision making. Nobody cares if pizza-witches wrongfully broke terms. With Twitter at least peoples’ ears perk up. In other words, there’s no rules in the alley. But there are rules in the town square. [1]: https://reclaimthenet.org/f-droid-bans-gab-app/ https://reclaimthenet.org/f-droid-bans-gab-app/

Macha 6y ago
This is mostly untrue. There was no requirement to blacklist gab. Mastodon clients on f-droid are allowed let users use Gab. What f-droid does not allow is apps preconfigured to connect to Gab, or who's primary purpose is to connect to Gab. There was even a petition to have fdroid remove an app (fedilab) that had a blacklist to disallow Gab then removed it, claiming that removing Gab from the blacklist was specifically endorsing it, and there were some people who tried to claiming that not apps that were not blacklisting Gab when other apps did meant those apps primary purpose was to connect to Gab, but f-droid weren't having it: https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/issues/1736 https://gitlab.com/fdroid/fdroiddata/-/issues/1736. However, they did consider an app that was a straight fork tracking another with the only change being the removal of a blacklist to be disallowed.
- Kinrany 6y ago
  Could you rephrase the fourth paragraph?
  - Macha 6y ago
    fedilab was allowed despite removing a blacklist. This was because not having a blacklist was not the app's sole distinction from other mastodon apps (it had a majorly different UI), so its purpose was determined to be more than just accessing Gab. However, some fdroid users asked for its removal. They felt removing the blacklist feature, which had previously only blocked gab, was itself an endorsement of Gab and indicated the app's purpose was to access Gab since the other available mastodon app (Tusky) still had a blacklist. fdroid did not agree and fedilab is still available. OpenTusky was not allowed as it was literally Tusky with the server blacklist removed, created in response to Tusky blocking Gab. It also advertised this in the app description, so fdroid judged it to be primarily for accessing gab and removed it.

dominotw 6y ago

I use the app to chat with my mom. My mom is not going to install F-Droid or whatever. This comment reminds me of the famous dropbox comment on HN.

NullPrefix 6y ago
Care to share the famous comment for those not in the know?
- _huayra_ 6y ago
  iirc, the quote s/he's referring to is approximately "Dropbox won't ever take off because it's just glorified rsync and everyone can already do that", i.e. "everyone" can rsync
- dgellow 6y ago
  See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8863
unethical_ban 6y ago
There was a time when people did click a download link. Installing APKs are easier than fiddling with most app settings. Think of how Fortnite was distributed via APK when Epic was big enough to tell people how to do it. I don't deny the utility of app stores. My point was about the freedom of platform at a capability level.