3 ms·

It really, really sucks to be tricked into installing malware, and I have sympathy for the victims. But this measure will remove so much freedom from a much lar

It really, really sucks to be tricked into installing malware, and I have sympathy for the victims. But this measure will remove so much freedom from a much larger group of people, and therfore it isn't justified. We just have to educate people better about how to protect themselves online, not resort to paternalistic control regimes which just happens to give one of the largest tech giants the power to also crush anything that it sees as a threat to their business model.

notepad0x90 1y ago
> But this measure will remove so much freedom from a much larger group of people, and therfore it isn't justified. Maybe that's the disconnect here, because i don't think you/others lack empathy for regular people being victimized. You're incorrect about that figure, the people being actually impacted (not merely compromised but harmed, as in financial loss, job loss, harassment, or worse) is many times more than people who want to sideload apps. Educating people doesn't work. We've been doing it with phishing for decades now , and it has no impact. in the moment, you're sure it's legitimate, so you won't look for obvious signs of phishiness.They use a lure to establish trust in the context, so you guards are down. Absolutely anyone can fall for deceptive lures. No amount of education changes that. You know what made a difference with phishing? Trust senders, DKIM/SPF validation, url-rewriting with sandbox detonation and global-scale reputation analysis/response (it means as soon as you hit one person, your domain/infra gets burned globally) ,etc.. It really frustrates me to no end, because it is the exact audience on HN that innovate and create software/apps but the level of ignorance on this subject is atrocious. I know you guys care as much as I do when people get hurt! It's just a case of knowing a lot about one domain and assuming you also know a lot about a related domain I think.
- ulrikrasmussen 1y ago
  Even if I'm in the minority it still doesn't justify it. I'm sorry, it sucks, but I don't hold this position because I lack knowledge, I hold it because I think giving up freedom to control our own devices is too much, even if it means people will get hurt. I also perfectly understand how cameras in every home will prevent so much domestic abuse and crime, but I am still against it. Not because I don't understand how many people are victim to these things, but because I think the intrusion on ME is too much.
  - notepad0x90 1y ago
    But we're not talking about your devices, so long as you have alternatives. and Apple has this policy already. But unlike apple, you can use non-google-certified builds just fine and do whatever you want. Also, how about not using android or iphones at all, support a FOSS phone with 100% control over it? This is a private business selling services to the public, taking measures to protect the public. You or anyone else has no entitlement or rights over how they provide that service. The right you have is to not spend your money on that business. Getting a phone that doesn't give you root on it to begin with is submitting to Google's (and vendor's) authority to arbitrarily decide what gets and doesn't get installed on your device.
    - ulrikrasmussen 1y ago
      I AM using GrapheneOS, but its future is also uncertain as Google has gutted AOSP. There aren't really any alternatives, and the problem is that phones are much more than just phones now, they are general purpose computing devices and run many applications that are pretty essential to modern society, such as ticket apps for public transport, government identity apps, payment apps and so on. In my country, Denmark, we are getting mandatory age verification next year, and it looks like it's going to be offered only as an app. These apps are simply not available for non-AOSP Linux phones, and there is little hope that they'll ever be. Owning a smartphone is becoming less of a choice, and it's becoming harder to own one that respects my freedom. I don't think it is entitlement to demand freedom in an ecosystem that I feel I am forced into.
      - notepad0x90 1y ago
        I say let's fight against smartphone usage being required everywhere. I don't care if the phone is FOSS or not, we still should be allowed to not have a personal tracking device. I am also all for supporting a fork of AOSP. The EU talks big on not depending on US tech companies, it even funds lots of FOSS projects, this should be on top of their list. The fact that your country is getting age verification, given how democratic and free Denmark is should tell you the prevailing view of the public on the subject matter. Why not focus on what everyone will support - which is being free from tech companies and closed code systems. The 99% of people that do pay for phones, don't think about technology much, they don't even know what sideloading is let along care about it. You/HN is an extreme minority in that aspect, as are android devs. and there are definitely more people being adversely impacted by sideloaded malware. Freedom that is not practical is just wishful thinking. Freedom that ignores the harm caused on others is tyranny by any other name.

notepad0x90 1y ago

> But this measure will remove so much freedom from a much larger group of people, and therfore it isn't justified. Maybe that's the disconnect here, because i don't think you/others lack empathy for regular people being victimized. You're incorrect about that figure, the people being actually impacted (not merely compromised but harmed, as in financial loss, job loss, harassment, or worse) is many times more than people who want to sideload apps. Educating people doesn't work. We've been doing it with phishing for decades now , and it has no impact. in the moment, you're sure it's legitimate, so you won't look for obvious signs of phishiness.They use a lure to establish trust in the context, so you guards are down. Absolutely anyone can fall for deceptive lures. No amount of education changes that. You know what made a difference with phishing? Trust senders, DKIM/SPF validation, url-rewriting with sandbox detonation and global-scale reputation analysis/response (it means as soon as you hit one person, your domain/infra gets burned globally) ,etc.. It really frustrates me to no end, because it is the exact audience on HN that innovate and create software/apps but the level of ignorance on this subject is atrocious. I know you guys care as much as I do when people get hurt! It's just a case of knowing a lot about one domain and assuming you also know a lot about a related domain I think.

ulrikrasmussen 1y ago
Even if I'm in the minority it still doesn't justify it. I'm sorry, it sucks, but I don't hold this position because I lack knowledge, I hold it because I think giving up freedom to control our own devices is too much, even if it means people will get hurt. I also perfectly understand how cameras in every home will prevent so much domestic abuse and crime, but I am still against it. Not because I don't understand how many people are victim to these things, but because I think the intrusion on ME is too much.
- notepad0x90 1y ago
  But we're not talking about your devices, so long as you have alternatives. and Apple has this policy already. But unlike apple, you can use non-google-certified builds just fine and do whatever you want. Also, how about not using android or iphones at all, support a FOSS phone with 100% control over it? This is a private business selling services to the public, taking measures to protect the public. You or anyone else has no entitlement or rights over how they provide that service. The right you have is to not spend your money on that business. Getting a phone that doesn't give you root on it to begin with is submitting to Google's (and vendor's) authority to arbitrarily decide what gets and doesn't get installed on your device.
  - ulrikrasmussen 1y ago
    I AM using GrapheneOS, but its future is also uncertain as Google has gutted AOSP. There aren't really any alternatives, and the problem is that phones are much more than just phones now, they are general purpose computing devices and run many applications that are pretty essential to modern society, such as ticket apps for public transport, government identity apps, payment apps and so on. In my country, Denmark, we are getting mandatory age verification next year, and it looks like it's going to be offered only as an app. These apps are simply not available for non-AOSP Linux phones, and there is little hope that they'll ever be. Owning a smartphone is becoming less of a choice, and it's becoming harder to own one that respects my freedom. I don't think it is entitlement to demand freedom in an ecosystem that I feel I am forced into.
    - notepad0x90 1y ago
      I say let's fight against smartphone usage being required everywhere. I don't care if the phone is FOSS or not, we still should be allowed to not have a personal tracking device. I am also all for supporting a fork of AOSP. The EU talks big on not depending on US tech companies, it even funds lots of FOSS projects, this should be on top of their list. The fact that your country is getting age verification, given how democratic and free Denmark is should tell you the prevailing view of the public on the subject matter. Why not focus on what everyone will support - which is being free from tech companies and closed code systems. The 99% of people that do pay for phones, don't think about technology much, they don't even know what sideloading is let along care about it. You/HN is an extreme minority in that aspect, as are android devs. and there are definitely more people being adversely impacted by sideloaded malware. Freedom that is not practical is just wishful thinking. Freedom that ignores the harm caused on others is tyranny by any other name.