Reading between the lines though I think it's likely that you can still install apps whose package has not been registered. Potentially this will require adb or putting your device into developer mode. For the sample app scenario you may be able to still install via adb. For example adb install does not trigger Play Protect.
In regards to the privacy policy, it's misleading to also not including the part of "based on our instructions and in compliance with our Privacy Policy and any other appropriate confidentiality and security measures." The why for this clause is so that Google can avoid NIH, not having to build everything their business needs in house.
A special carve out for anonymous apps only for people with government connections doesn't help because it fingerprints the operative.
Tor was originally a deniable communications tool.
And why is a phone different from a computer? Nobody bats an eye when downloading program on computer, or visiting a website with arbitrary code.
The example was recent and very clearly put the developer at personal risk. But there are many gray-zones.
An app to decode car diagnostics codes isn't unlawful, but being personally identified could get you in alot of trouble by car companies anyway.
And what about making an independent news app in Russia? More clearly ok by our morals and law, but very dangerous for the developer.
Heck, even one of Google's apps tracks speeding camera locations and police: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.waze&hl=en
It's also really stupid to drive a car in a flood, but we don't have cars check the weather forecast before starting up( maybe I shouldn't post this, might give someone some ideas).
That's for a judge to decide, not for a supranational mega corporation.
> For the sample app scenario you may be able to still install via adb.
Keyword: may.
"debugger vendors in 2047 distributed numbered copies only, and only to officially licensed and bonded programmers." - Richard Stallman, The Right to Read, 1997
People will be running pirated debugger copies if that comes to shove
99.9% of people DNGAF about OSS. They do care about doing what they need on their phone without malware/bloatware/nagware
Also publishing and development are separate activities
Stallman's "Right to Read" is an accurate reflection of reality in that sense.
Yeah I agree his opinion is probably more balanced, however Right to read is a short story displaying characters with too much learned helplessness and too little agency so I'm just going based on what he literally put to paper
Yeah you're absolutely right, tell that to Facebook/Instagram/Temu/TikTok/Pinduoduo/(any other _spying_ apps) users.
I only have Linux PCs (laptops) and servers, 100% of my work and personal stuff is done there (though for work I do need to hop into MS365, Google Workspace, Zoom, etc, hooray for browsers, my final firewall between me and the walled gardens, though we can have a whole discussion on that).
For mobile, we have PostmarketOS, Phosh, Ubuntu Touch. I really must try living in them, is it on me? IDK, our government even has an identity app for iOS and Android. I should not be using it, I should stick to web. But its so much more convenient. I'm just weak, aren't I?
Maybe I should go for Ubuntu touch, with an iPad on the side or something. At least my most personal device is something I control then. Or just keep my Linux laptop handy (or make a cyberdeck!). But I want a computing platform that does not require carrying a bag. It's kinda sad. Even GrapheneOS (one of the most personal and secure mobile computing experiences out there)'s future is in the hands of its greatest adversary, the one that does not want you to have a personal computing experience.
So, how can anyone expect FOSS mobile OSs to ever exist unless forced by law by the US or something?
So, how do we get to a commodity layer for Mobile devices? It looked like it was going to be Linux (Android), and that was Google's intention. But now they are just using their significant resources to corrupt that original idea, using their trojan horse called "play services".
The public at large only cares about convenience, not about privacy. Why don't we? How much enshitification is enough to draw that line in the sand?
(I am holding out hope for the phone that the GrapheneOS project is planning to make.)
In 2025 you’d be viewed just as much suspicion for not building your stack on Freedom. I still have hope that we’ll get there with phones, too, some day.
This is a huge factor. Mobile chip sets (CPU/SoC, crypto enclaves, GPU modems/basebands) are buried under NDAs a mile thick, and you can't just whack an oscilloscope on the bus like its 1979. Those companies treat their opaque hardware as their defense against IP theft, they'll never, ever give it up in the current environment.
And the cameras are super complex and require a bunch of DSP and AI to even vaguely work let alone do all the headline features.
So I moved to Dhizuku. It's a bit hard to setup, but once I'm done it's felt like untethered jailbreak - I don't have to complicated dance to start Shizuku now. Dhizuku basically make your phone a company phone, except it report to you. To setup a "managed main profile" you'd need to remove all accounts visible in Android account system and type a long ADB command so I don't think it can be maliciously done.
I suppose this will be how we'll use F-Droid in the next year for enthusiasts.
I don't have a banking app installed on my phone. When I need to make a bank transfer I sit down at the computer.
1: None, no anonymous accounts allowed. 2: None. Civil what?. 3: It's the Google's company policy, don't use our products if you don't agree to it. 4: If devs write apps for this nearly impossible to develop Mac AppStore ecosystem, I don't see even a slightest problem here. 5: Just change package IDs.
Thank you for listening, see you again next time.
It's already happening. The greediness of vendors, the ignorance of users...
Or are users just going to face network bans and additional tracking like with grapheneos?
Currently probably the best route is basing the OS on Android (so that you can benefit from all the existing apps), making a non-hostile reference device, and getting regulators' attention (the EU is probably the most likely to succeed) to break Google's monopoly on attestation.
This is largely what GrapheneOS is currently trying. I think what we can do as users is install GrapheneOS with sandboxed Google Play and for any apps that do not work, contact their developers. If GrapheneOS manages to get millions of users and get on the radar of app developers, that's the best shot I think.
But it feels like the window is closing quickly. So if you care at all about any of this, today is the day to get a GrapheneOS device and make yourself heard.
If the app is monetized, then the full mailing address is shared.
If money is involved, it’s fair for users to know who they’re dealing with. Developers who want to hide their personal identity can still do so legally with a shell company.
Taking it a step further, if I am going to run your code on my device, I want to know who I'm giving access to my data/cpu/hardware.
Just like with offline transactions, customers should know who they are giving money to.
----
> Google will display your legal name, your country (as per your legal address) and developer email address on Google Play. If you decide to monetise on Google Play, then Google will display your full address.
[0] - https://support.google.com/googleplay/android-developer/answ...
In fact that latter example might provide a solution. Set up a company willing to publish apps whilst hiding the actual developer's identity.
sschueller•1h ago
Shame on Google and Apple, it was always clear this was the end goal and next up is also your PC.
Right after will come the removal off apps they don't like and there is nothing you can do about it.
Stallman was right
mettamage•45m ago
[1] Feel free to discuss this too, if you want. I'm developing my opinion on it.
progval•40m ago
LambdaComplex•27m ago
Read up on the principles of the Free Software Foundation if you want all the details.
timeon•5m ago
Already starting on macos. Gatekeeper had setting where you could allow any app. Now it is removed. While still possible to allow individual app (you need to do it after every OS update), trajectory is now clear.