29 ms·

I wonder to what extent the supposed user benefits of central control of apps are true. Maybe arbitrary programs on a phone is akin to a random .exe on Windows

I wonder to what extent the supposed user benefits of central control of apps are true. Maybe arbitrary programs on a phone is akin to a random .exe on Windows 95, but instead of Windows 95 it's a computing platform that a majority of human beings have in their pocket and that can provide direct or indirect access to almost all personal and financial information. I mean, you have to grant the privileges, but of course you will. Maybe having a locked down library of programs is good, I'm just too much of a cynic to see it as anything but a power grab. On the other hand, maybe the support and legal headaches of customers "screwing themselves up" also plays a part, especially when there's a whole dark industry to trick people into screwing themselves up.

marcosdumay 2y ago
If locking the user's data was the goal, Google would many a non-negative amount of effort locking the user's data from malicious apps. Instead, they work on mixing the data so much users can't tell what is being accessed, blocking data-redacting apps, and making sure term changes are invisible.
beeflet 2y ago
>Maybe arbitrary programs on a phone is akin to a random .exe on Windows 95 No, it isn't because there is already sandboxing. >that can provide direct or indirect access to almost all personal and financial information. Windows 95 computers also used to have web browsers and bank information. The risk has not progressed