• supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I will literally go without a smartphone if Google does this, this is insane I would have bought an iphone if I wanted a junk device I don’t actually own.

    • Jinni@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      25 minutes ago

      If this effects de-googled android, I will probably start investing in Linux phones.

      I would rather have a limited phone than has full freedom than one that makes everyone go through Google.

    • Flatfire@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 hour ago

      The crazy part is this may make iOS the better alternative when considering the emergence of third-party app stores and Apple’s loosening grip on their ecosystem.

      LineageOS is still a good option too, for anyone who would prefer to keep the phone they have

      • Pirate2377@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        48 minutes ago

        iOS would be the better alternative, if it wasn’t for the hardware they run on. After all, Apple is infamous for their blatant planned obsolescence on their iPhones since the iPhone 6. Unfortunately, Google seems to be following Apple in this way as well since they launched an update that made the Pixel 6a’s battery so much worse than before. Therefore, we must all have a dumb phone + Linux phone set up…or something

        • Nikls94@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 minutes ago

          Apple is infamous for their blatant planned obsolescence on their iPhones since the iPhone 6

          They learned from it. The phone toggles itself when the battery health is at 80% max capacity, but this is toggleable. Also, the iPhone 11 still runs smooth.

      • cley_faye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 minutes ago

        They both go for the least open option. If asking for all devs registration and validation from google is viable and legally sound, apple will do the same if that’s not already in the pipe.

        Both “stores” are targeted for the same issues.

  • barnaclebutt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    62
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Isn’t this illegal in Europe? Was that the whole point of forcing apple to allow alternative app stores?

    • progandy@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      25 minutes ago

      Technically, third party app stores are allowed. Developers “only” register with google to receive a developer certificate. Isn’t apple doing the same thing in response to the EU regulations and that has been allowed?

  • blueworld@piefed.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    3 hours ago

    For those in Europe, write your representatives.

    Fro me f-droid’s post: https://f-droid.org/2025/09/29/google-developer-registration-decree.html

    What do we propose?

    Regulatory and competition authorities should look carefully at Google’s proposed activities, and ensure that policies designed to improve security are not abused to consolidate monopoly control. We urge regulators to safeguard the ability of alternative app stores and open-source projects to operate freely, and to protect developers who cannot or will not comply with exclusionary registration schemes and demands for personal information.

    If you are a developer or user who values digital freedom, you can help. Write to your Member of ParliamentCongressperson or other representative, sign petitions in defense of sideloading, and contact the European Commission’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) team to express why preserving open distribution matters. By making your voice heard, you help defend not only F-Droid, but the principle that software should remain a commons, accessible and free from unnecessary corporate gatekeeping.

    https://f-droid.org/2025/09/04/twif.html [^antifeatures]: F-Droid Anti-Features overview: https://f-droid.org/docs/Anti-Features/ [^howmanyusers]: How many F-Droid users are there, exactly? We don’t know, because we don’t track users or have any registration. “No user accounts, by design”: https://f-droid.org/2022/02/28/no-user-accounts-by-design.html [^sideloading]: ‘“Sideload” is a weird euphemism that the mobile duopoly came up with; it means “installing software without our permission,” which we used to just call “installing software” (because you don’t need a manufacturer’s permission to install software on your computer).’ — Pluralistic: Darth Androidhttps://pluralistic.net/2025/09/01/fulu/ [^playprotect]: “Google Play Protect checks your apps and devices for harmful behavior”: https://support.google.com/googleplay/answer/2812853

  • kadu@scribe.disroot.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    101
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Technically illegal where I live.

    In Brazil you can’t sell a device with a given feature and then remove said feature in a software update. Even Apple, known for never allowing downgrades, was forced to downgrade and pay a fine to a customer after his iPad 3 updated to iOS 7 and lost an iOS 6 feature.

    In other words… every single Android device sold until today in Brazil allows sideloading. Even if a single customer uses a sideloaded app, removing the ability to sideload freely would be illegal, and because the original feature didn’t require a developer signature it can’t be enforced now.

    The issue is, as always, if this went to court somebody would have to manage to explain to a tech illiterate judge what a “developer signature” is, how this relates to “sideloading” and so on.

    • ɯᴉuoʇuɐ@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      33 minutes ago

      The problem might be that Google will argue this isn’t a downgrade at all, but an upgrade (for “security” reasons). I don’t want to be a pessimist, but the tech illiterate judges could eat that up.

    • Lojcs@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      3 hours ago

      … Brazil is one of the first countries this’ll go into effect and I also remember something about how that first batch of countries was chosen because their governmemts support this change.

      • kadu@scribe.disroot.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        3 hours ago

        because their governmemts support this change.

        I can see how Google’s PR team might use this argument, but it’s certainly illegal in Brazil so our government most definitely isn’t supporting this decision. Also, it needs to be way more specific than “government” - who exactly is endorsing this? Procon? Anatel? Polícia Federal?

        Either way, the actual reason for targeting Brazil as one of the first is because we do love our piracy, which naturally translates into sideloading being frequent.

  • damon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Hopefully they go to court to get an injunction. Hopefully, they also go to the powers that be in the EU, those same powers have been so focused on the Apple App Store they failed to take into account Google can do something like this with the Play Store. It would be a shame for the F-Droid project to end but it is completely avoidable.

    • unknownuserunknownlocation@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 hours ago

      To be fair, up until recently, there was no clear indication that Google would do this. Google made it so that installing non-play store apps was slightly more difficult, Apple made it pretty much impossible. So Apple was a pretty logical target at that point (and honestly, up until then, they had pretty much gotten a free ride - think of the default browser issue in Windows, no one every bothered with Apple).

      • ripcord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        5 hours ago

        We can also do that.

        Complain without doing something is worse than doing something like the other person suggested, though.

        • primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          Complaining tells yhe company this isn’t popular. Complaining while talking about alternatives is helping others towards doing something, and giving the idea that it will be a net negativeove for their hegemony,even if you don’t do shit.

  • Tiger_Man_@szmer.info
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 hours ago

    Would this be possible to bypass by bulding an app from source and convincing android that you are a developer who is testing his program?

    • WhyJiffie@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      13 minutes ago

      theoretically installing through ADB will still work. but that’s very impractical, and f-droid cannot do that.

  • EonNShadow@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 hours ago

    My job doesn’t allow me to use a jailbroken/rooted device

    So if/when this goes through I’ll be switching to iOS.

    Given the choice between two closed platforms, I’ll pick the one that ostensibly says they’re privacy focused instead of the one actively enshittifying their product.

    • kamen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      2 hours ago

      I obviously don’t know your situation, but using your own phone for work is a bit of a red flag. If you’re required to use a phone for work, ideally the job should provide you one that meets their requirements.

      • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Yeah, a mandatory work phone (where the employer can define requirements) should be purchased and funded by the employer.

      • snoons@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        3 hours ago

        I must assume they mean no use it for their business that they own. Otherwise I’ll just be sad.

    • DarkAri@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You should just get a cheap phone to use for work. No reason to have their software on your own device. That will undoubtedly be used for creepy purposes.

  • ook@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    ·
    6 hours ago

    I am really glad to see these articles popping up now. Since the news broke a week back or so it was suspiciously quiet about this, despite lots of negative comments here.

    • manxu@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I never wanted him to be wrong more than right now. Except for tomorrow, it’s probably going to bé worse, tomorrow

      • damon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        69
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 hours ago

        Except when it comes to women and girls, he’s absolutely wrong

      • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I sometimes like to read his political posts:

        https://www.stallman.org/archives/2025-jul-oct.html

        And honestly? I mostly agree with them? Like this:

        ABC ordered to pay Antoinette Lattouf another $150,000 for unlawful termination over Gaza Instagram post.

        But a company faced with enormous threats wielded by fascist officials who demand that certain views be suppressed will treat such penalties as the normal cost of sucking up.

        The [Israeli] army says that HAMAS is using apartment buildings for “surveillance”, and has bombed some of those buildings to destroy them. Based on this logic, the army might bomb every tall building in Gaza City with the large bombs that the US is providing

        He has some questionable beliefs as well, though for unusual reasons. He accepts non-binary people but refuses to use they/them pronouns because he doesn’t like the ambiguity of singular/plural pronouns. So he has invented the neopronouns per/pers to refer to singular non-binary persons. I genuinely think no other person on this planet could hold this opinion.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          I genuinely think no other person on this planet could hold this opinion.

          Eh, I’m pretty close to this opinion.

          A family member came out as non-binary, and I don’t like to use they/them (for the same reason as Stallman), but I also think creating my own pronouns is more offensive, so I just use their first name, unless I can’t easily avoid it (like this sentence). I’m not trying to be offensive, I just don’t like they/them as angular pronouns. I also don’t like “you” as both singular and plural, but I’m also not ready to use “y’all”, so I refer to second person groups without the pronoun (if feasible).

          On a related note, I also think gender is a social construct and not actually “real.” Sex exists because it’s a biological thing, but it shouldn’t be directly tied to your role in society. To change my mind, I need empirical evidence that there’s some unique difference between men and women (brain wave patterns?) that aligns groups of non-binary people or aligns trans people with people of the opposite sex. I personally don’t think this exists, and gender fluidity is more a symptom of a culture that isn’t well equipped to handle people who don’t nicely fit into a bucket. I think gender is a useful metaphor for what’s going on, and I absolutely support people fighting for using it to get the recognition they need, but I don’t think it’s an actual, scientifically proven thing.

          The only real difference is that I use first names to refer to non-binary people’s first names more frequently than to binary people. I hope that doesn’t offend anyone, I just really don’t like using the same pronoun for both singular and plural.

        • primrosepathspeedrun@anarchist.nexus
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          29
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Okay that’s all cool or cool-and-stubbornly-autistic. But he has some other opinions that are not, about consent and age.

          So the blanket ‘fuck yeah, stallman!’ Doesn’t really fly anymore.

          • yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            5 hours ago

            Hasn’t he admitted to changing his opinion after learning about the effects on children? I’m not in the loop about this.

            But yeah, you definitely shouldn’t treat his words as gospel. A lot of questionable-at-best stuff in there.

            • kadu@scribe.disroot.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              18
              ·
              edit-2
              4 hours ago

              Hasn’t he admitted to changing his opinion after learning about the effects on children?

              He did. The argument against him was half based on misquotes and incomplete sentences, but the other half was indeed once his opinion - he argued that age of consent was a dumb concept and that instead it should be based on what the child wants to do and any harm they were subjected to.

              He later on said he regretted this view because it was explained to him that there’s no ability to consent and this always causes harm to the child. His original arguments were, in typical Stallman fashion, quite obsessed with definitions themselves, almost as if the subject at hand didn’t really matter he was just bothered about how the definition had some flaws.

              But even with that in mind… I can’t feel comfortable knowing he defended this point of view, and it does significantly harm my opinion about him.

              • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 hours ago

                Everything you said there is pretty typical with high functioning ASD, up to and including others being uncomfortable with past behavior and statements.

                I can’t say I disagree with him - in an ideal world. Now all we need is a world where it’s easy enough to tell if someone is mature enough to make those kinds of decisions, no one uses power imbalances to allow them to achieve their desires, kids are fully aware of the impact their decisions will have on them decades in the future, and on and on. That’s clearly not the world we live in, and I expect it will never be, and so we err on the side of caution, and don’t condone children engaging in certain activities until they’re older, and even then only with people of a similar age until such a time where trying to stop them from engaging in potentially reckless behavior is more harmful than allowing them to do so.

        • Kami@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          5 hours ago

          Ok, let’s say he’s right only when he talks about software.

          That should do it. I hope.

          EDIT: well and hardware too I guess.

          EDIT2: oh and paid public toilets.

      • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 hours ago

        Unless he’s championing paedophilia and bestiality, which he has done on a number of occasions. Or being an absolute creep with women, which he’s also done.

  • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    5 hours ago

    How does google plan to enforce this? Will they disable side-loading for any app that isn’t registered with google?

  • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    6 hours ago

    This is why I didn’t bother switching to GOS, Lineage, Calyx etc despite being sick of Apple’s anti-foss monopoly — marketed as Privacy™️ and Security™️ — for years.

    The late stage capitalism of western oligarchies indicated that Google’s rug pull of AOSP was an imminent inevitability. After already having to change my services and workflows multiple times over the last 2 decades — despite careful analysis and forethought — due to services ever changing value propositions, acquisitions, and all other forms of enshittification, I’m at the point where I won’t bother wasting energy on 99% of digital products unless they’re open source and I can run them indefinitely on my own Linux server.

    The more dependent you grow on digital products, the more interdependent they become, and the more time and effort is required to replace or substitute them.

    • Tetsuo@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      This is why I didn’t bother switching to GOS, Lineage, Calyx etc despite being sick of Apple’s anti-foss monopoly — marketed as Privacy™️ and Security™️ — for years.

      Bullshit. If you liked so much your freedom and privacy you would have many opportunities to use open source ROMs. You chose to stay on your iPhone because it was easy.

      Also absolutely not believing you when you say that you anticipated the rug pull and chose to “not bother” for that reason. What a poor excuse for staying and supporting the closed ecosystem of Apple.

      After already having to change my services and workflows multiple times over the last 2 decades

      I can’t believe someone who has been for years on an iPhone would pretend they are an ardent defender of freedom and open source.

    • yistdaj@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      What stops those open source projects having that same rugpull? AOSP was open source and for a long time could be installed on one’s phone indefinitely.

      You could argue ownership, but if Audacity can be bought then so can nearly anything.

      • notfromhere@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I’m out of the loop, what’s that about Audacity? Looks like they still have a github repo with very recent activity and Wikipedia says their trademark was acquired by a company in 2021.