4 ms·

Y'all are too optimistic. I will predict for you the future of that, based on the past. The next people in line who control most devices are the carriers. Th

Y'all are too optimistic. I will predict for you the future of that, based on the past. The next people in line who control most devices are the carriers. They will set up app stores that are required on their phones (since the laws will not prevent this). Each will have exclusive apps that require their app store be installed (and will not be available on other phones). Things will be a mishmash. Nobody will be actually happy. The carriers also have great lobbyists, and are really great at doing this kind of thing. It will take a long time to undo it.

hypothesis 5y ago
> Nobody will be actually happy. I’ve heard people say that about true compromise… It seems like there are extremes, carriers were abusing their positions before Apple came up with iPhone and app store and wrangled power away from carriers. Now they have lived long enough to become the villain… it might be time to reset matrix again and work towards a better outcome.
- DannyBee 5y ago
  The natural state of these things is one where someone is abusing it, whether carriers or someone else. I don't actually disagree with your assessment of what happened, but i don't have the hope people here do. I have watched the ebb and flow too many times, and lived in DC too long :) I also think the hope is amazingly misplaced. Rarely, if ever, do complex systems like this change in the desired way as a result of trying to "fix them" directly. Sometimes they change, sometimes the inertia keeps them in the same state. But it rarely, if ever, does this kind of change have the intended effect. They even teach this in complex system theory.
  - Dracophoenix 5y ago
    >> Sometimes they change, sometimes the inertia keeps them in the same state. But it rarely, if ever, does this kind of change have the intended effect. The Monkey's Paw, I take it.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
ocdtrekkie 5y ago
There are three major national carriers (a fourth launching soon), and an absolute glut of smaller MVNOs which offer devices on their own terms. Most of both the national carriers and the MVNOs will also allow you to bring your own device, which as long as isn't running Android, is probably not encumbered by malicious code. Even if the horrors you suggest are true, consumers would have options to get around them, whilst right now, a single monopoly, Google, controls the entire playing field, and actively attacks anyone who tries to offer a path around (Epic, for instance). The "ISP bogeyman" issue constantly feels hollow in tech circles considering there's a ton of actual competition in the provider space, and a complete and unassailable monopoly in the tech platform space.
- techrat 5y ago
  Nearly everything you've said was bullshit. Google has never restricted sideloading. Android 12 even enables sideloading further by allowing third party app stores to auto update. AOSP exists. Third party roms exist. All of the devices sold by Google can be unlocked to install third party roms. LineageOS doesn't exist because 'a complete and unassailable monopoly' allows them to.
  - ocdtrekkie 5y ago
    Google admits it tries to prevent sideloading as much as possible in their own court filings with Epic. Their own managers called the experience "abysmal", and they considered buying Epic to prevent them from doing it. Also they sent Project Zero out to portray Epic as "insecure" in a bunch of hit pieces across the media. AOSP is not meaningfully existing on any device sold today. The fact you can hack your device doesn't change the monopoly Google operates that 99.9% of Android devices are trapped in.
    - techrat 5y ago
      > Google admits it tries to prevent sideloading as much as possible in their own court filings with Epic. [citation needed] I know what you're referring to and I know you're being wholly disingenuous. > AOSP is not meaningfully existing on any device sold today. AOSP is technically sold on every device since that's what every single Android version *AND* skin is based on. If you want to do something that isn't supported by the oem, then do it yourself. Nothing stops you from being able to do so which is the entire damn point. > The fact you can hack your device doesn't change the monopoly Google operates that 99.9% of Android devices are trapped in. An unlockable bootloader isn't a hack. Try again. For an IT Consultant, you're remarkably ignorant when it comes to the reality of Android.
totetsu 5y ago
My Japanese work phone came bundled with "app pass" an app store with a monthly 350yen subscription cost. I didnt even know it existed till I saw some brief toast overlay about it updating successfully. https://kuronekoblog.com/6169/ https://kuronekoblog.com/6169/
MrStonedOne 5y ago
> They will set up app stores that are required on their phones (since the laws will not prevent this). It does prevent this. All apps and app stores included with the device must be disableable is in the language of the bill.
- DannyBee 5y ago
  Errr, no they don't. Yes, they must be disable-able. It does not require the phone maintain the same functionality, etc. For example, Verizon makes visual voicemail only available on the verizon store. You can disable it, you can remove it. That won't get you the functionality!
thebean11 5y ago
I think this is a stretch, and forcing Apple to allow sideloads is a more likely outcome.

hypothesis 5y ago

> Nobody will be actually happy. I’ve heard people say that about true compromise… It seems like there are extremes, carriers were abusing their positions before Apple came up with iPhone and app store and wrangled power away from carriers. Now they have lived long enough to become the villain… it might be time to reset matrix again and work towards a better outcome.

DannyBee 5y ago
The natural state of these things is one where someone is abusing it, whether carriers or someone else. I don't actually disagree with your assessment of what happened, but i don't have the hope people here do. I have watched the ebb and flow too many times, and lived in DC too long :) I also think the hope is amazingly misplaced. Rarely, if ever, do complex systems like this change in the desired way as a result of trying to "fix them" directly. Sometimes they change, sometimes the inertia keeps them in the same state. But it rarely, if ever, does this kind of change have the intended effect. They even teach this in complex system theory.
- Dracophoenix 5y ago
  >> Sometimes they change, sometimes the inertia keeps them in the same state. But it rarely, if ever, does this kind of change have the intended effect. The Monkey's Paw, I take it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

ocdtrekkie 5y ago

There are three major national carriers (a fourth launching soon), and an absolute glut of smaller MVNOs which offer devices on their own terms. Most of both the national carriers and the MVNOs will also allow you to bring your own device, which as long as isn't running Android, is probably not encumbered by malicious code. Even if the horrors you suggest are true, consumers would have options to get around them, whilst right now, a single monopoly, Google, controls the entire playing field, and actively attacks anyone who tries to offer a path around (Epic, for instance). The "ISP bogeyman" issue constantly feels hollow in tech circles considering there's a ton of actual competition in the provider space, and a complete and unassailable monopoly in the tech platform space.

techrat 5y ago
Nearly everything you've said was bullshit. Google has never restricted sideloading. Android 12 even enables sideloading further by allowing third party app stores to auto update. AOSP exists. Third party roms exist. All of the devices sold by Google can be unlocked to install third party roms. LineageOS doesn't exist because 'a complete and unassailable monopoly' allows them to.
- ocdtrekkie 5y ago
  Google admits it tries to prevent sideloading as much as possible in their own court filings with Epic. Their own managers called the experience "abysmal", and they considered buying Epic to prevent them from doing it. Also they sent Project Zero out to portray Epic as "insecure" in a bunch of hit pieces across the media. AOSP is not meaningfully existing on any device sold today. The fact you can hack your device doesn't change the monopoly Google operates that 99.9% of Android devices are trapped in.
  - techrat 5y ago
    > Google admits it tries to prevent sideloading as much as possible in their own court filings with Epic. [citation needed] I know what you're referring to and I know you're being wholly disingenuous. > AOSP is not meaningfully existing on any device sold today. AOSP is technically sold on every device since that's what every single Android version *AND* skin is based on. If you want to do something that isn't supported by the oem, then do it yourself. Nothing stops you from being able to do so which is the entire damn point. > The fact you can hack your device doesn't change the monopoly Google operates that 99.9% of Android devices are trapped in. An unlockable bootloader isn't a hack. Try again. For an IT Consultant, you're remarkably ignorant when it comes to the reality of Android.

totetsu 5y ago

My Japanese work phone came bundled with "app pass" an app store with a monthly 350yen subscription cost. I didnt even know it existed till I saw some brief toast overlay about it updating successfully. https://kuronekoblog.com/6169/ https://kuronekoblog.com/6169/

MrStonedOne 5y ago

> They will set up app stores that are required on their phones (since the laws will not prevent this). It does prevent this. All apps and app stores included with the device must be disableable is in the language of the bill.

DannyBee 5y ago
Errr, no they don't. Yes, they must be disable-able. It does not require the phone maintain the same functionality, etc. For example, Verizon makes visual voicemail only available on the verizon store. You can disable it, you can remove it. That won't get you the functionality!

thebean11 5y ago

I think this is a stretch, and forcing Apple to allow sideloads is a more likely outcome.