The app's README has recently been updated to include the statement: "Google has announced that, starting in 2026/2027, all apps on certified Android devices will require the developer to submit personal identity details directly to Google. Since the developers of this app do not agree to this requirement, this app will no longer work on certified Android devices after that time."

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuck Google. I bought my device and I want to do with it what I want!

Things can only go downhill from here, and it's hard to imagine how things could get any better. I mean, I can only hope Google will change their minds and see sense here.

I'm past the point where I care if my next device has "phone" features like calling and SMS. I'm fine with technical limitations, but I'm done with Apple and Google adding artificial ones.

Maybe I'll get a used Librem5. I'd get a Jolla phone, but they don't ship to the US. But honestly in my research, there's been no blogs I can find that compare these 3rd party phones to each other that aren't like 4 years old and outdated.

Soon there'll be a marketplace, where you can, for a few dollars, "hire a dev". They will use their identity documents and help you in obtaining a signing certificate.

I assume, since the statement specifically mentions CERTIFIED devices, that they do intend to further develop the app.

As always with Google policies, this means users will need to jump through more and more hoops (as today with custom ROMs and banking apps already). I really hope first and foremost that this policy can be reverted, and if not, that the community develops means of technological circumvention (examples mentioned by others include an "app runner" app or letting others identify the app).

It is a sad state the Android ecosystem is heading to.

Google might have to be careful how hard they push on security+greed+control tactics like this.

I think that most of the world is overdue to replace their ubiquitous computing devices with ones not controlled by the US, and the current administration's behavior must be accelerating those thoughts.

(BTW, if a platform were designed for security-first, rather than corporate-surveillance-and-and-passive-engagement-first, it wouldn't as much matter who wrote whatever "app" code ran on it.)

I'm still waiting to hear what the EU will have to say about all of this, it seems like a very clear violation of the Digital Markets Act to me.