I'm writing an app that I will distribute only through f-droid. The people I would like to share it with are typical, non-technical android users. Before those changes I could just send them a link to f-droid apk and explain it's just another app store or send a link to the apk directly and probably most of them would be able to install it. Now I would have to tell them to do all those weird things first, things that look suspicious and that they would not understand the purpose of. I don't think anyone will be wiling to do it. This is not a win. The effect will be exactly the same - serious limits on distributing apps though alternative channels.
this post was submitted on 19 Mar 2026
317 points (97.3% liked)
Technology
82830 readers
3191 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
the win in this is that many people realise how locked google has made android and how blatantly and arbitrarily google exerts their control over it. hopefully that will be input to some consumer decision (when sailfish becomes an alternative) and a tiny bit more people will consider their choice when getting a new phone. and maybe it also helps some regulation to be agreed (in europe, obviously).
It is always like this. Make a very anti consumer decision that everyone hates, then tone it down so the half of those people will say “we won”. This is a loss.
My galaxy will let me install but then I get this when I try to run the app:
I had this too. I installed it from playstore but maintain the software now via aurora. So far it works…
Christ
no.
i'll look into this, but they seem to have used the old strategy of announcing something absurd then back down to what they wanted because of "community pressure"
bonus for not looking bad in comparison, while still being bad.
Of course we didn't win. the more hoops you have to jump through, the fewer people who will install their own apps and then you lose all of the community support. And Google didn't promise not to change their plans in the future. So you know that they'll promise this now. Maybe they'll backtrack a little if they have to and they will try to ratchet things up six months later anyway.
Real solutions involve either breaking up monopolies or breaking up monopolies, which is why some of the other cell phone vendors' actions recently look positive. If there are two versions of Android that are popularly used, then the banks will have to support both of them and then everyone can run away from Google whenever they feel like it. But if there's only one popular version and Android itself gets more and more locked down then that is Google seizing the entire market and they will cut out all of the other cell phone manufacturers as soon as they can. that will be just as bad as Apple.
Then make the wait period a week, a month. Have this privilege expire every so often etc.
Try to pull warranty shenanigans if you ever went through the process.
I kind of wish they hadn’t. Fully blocking these apps would’ve really lit a fire in the open source world to create a serious alternative. Now people will just put up with the 1 day wait and carry on.
So fucking glad that GrapheneOS will probably be available for the new Motorola phones next year. I've been on pixels since they were Nexus, and if not for GrapheneOS, I would have jumped ship after the Pixel 4 and moved to Crapple.
I too am excited. I wish they'd just put it on a flagship Motorola now so I could buy it.
with a 24 hour delay guarunteed to punish anyone who wants to have their device their way.
Microsoft appeared to walk back Recall until they suddenly brought it back unannounced and doubled down. So I'll believe it when I see it
Yeah corpos don't respect consumers or norms of human dignity, they'll just do what they want more quietly if you complain. The only real solution is to break up monopolies (ideally for the last several decades).
Making users wait 24 hours doesn't improve security; it's an anti-competitive change designed to make the Google Play store seem like less of a hassle in comparison.
I can actually see where it can improve security against scammers trying to scam elderly and non-tech savvy people.
- Scammer tries to get someone to install malware from their site
- Victim isn't familiar with sideloading, but scammer instructs them
- Victim hits the first time 24 hour block and has to restart and wait
- The restart alone breaks contact with the scammer, scam thwarted
For the rest of us that know our way around Android, it's just a one time annoyance, after completing all the steps to enable sideloading, you won't have to wait 24 hours anymore.
Solution in search of a problem?
I have never seen a scam call involving sideloading an app on a phone... Why would they whenTeamViwer is in the Google app store?
Fuck I dunno, I haven't used the Play Store since Covid lockdown. I rather prefer to sideload most apps and avoid Google for the most part anyways.
Lets be real though, currently they already have to blow through 4 other warnings about installing unsigned APK and enabled the browser or file manager to be able to install applications. It's almost certain if they are that far deep/commited, they are going to call the scammer back if the scammer left a number.
Yes this might allow for a time delay where the scammers number could be disabled if reported by enough people, or someone else to be like "yo this is a scam" if they mentioned it but, I don't think this is as secure as they are saying it will be. The target audience for this is very unlikely to be thwarted by a time delay. Plus, the scammer will make some excuse about how the warning is just a safety percaucion and doesn't need to be followed as this is a normal usage of the toggle, and then have them call back after the delay is done.
For clarification: the target audience doesn't know about the scam, and all they care about is that someone is seemingly willing to assist with an issue or problem they have. Said person knows the solution and they just have to wait for the timer to be done to be able to do said solution. They have no reason of telling others about it (unless they were complaining about googles time delay) as they already got someone who is seemingly able to assist.
Honestly, having to have the user type "I agree that I have verified the application i am trying to install is genuine and not a fraudulent app" or a listbox of checkmarks to toggle in order to enable it would be far more efficient for this case.
Hell take the example image the article on the dev page has and make it into toggles instead and it would work far better than a timer does.
load more comments
(2 replies)
I'd believe that if most Pig Butchering scams weren't using apps from Google Play already.
load more comments
(2 replies)
It’s going to be effective, but it’s a sad world where you have to create a total nanny state because there exist a subset of users who are INCREDIBLY stupid.
Is it still a subset when it's the majority?
And to be honest, the level of effort scammers are willing to go through is shocking, and AI's just making it easier for them.
Evidence that any significant percentage of people, never mind the majority, is getting scammed? Then how many of them via app installs?
And to be honest, the level of effort scammers are willing to go through is shocking
Is it? If you live in a country like India, then a single successful scam will be able to pay for years of living expenses
Anything less than the whole is a subset, yes.
load more comments
(1 replies)
So, we will have to enable developer mode for that? How long before banking and government apps refuse to run if you have "sideloaded" apps installed? This will be the same as not allowing the majority of people to sideload. No win in here, just an advanced strategy from google to make us conform
I totally agree.
I am so tired of this "slow boil", bs.
load more comments
(11 replies)
No we didn't win. This is Google making it harder to install the programs you want, rather than the programs Google wants you to have.
We will win when nobody can tell you what you can or can’t put in your own fucking device.
load more comments
(6 replies)
- enable developer options
- confirm that you are not tricked
- restart phone and re-authenticate
- wait one day
- confirm with biometrics that you know what you are doing
- decide if you only want unrestricted installs for 1 week or forever
- confirm that you accept the risks
- enjoy the few apps that still have developers motivated to develop for a user-base willing to put up with this
A classic case of making a ridiculously restrictive change, then "walking it back" to a merely semi-ridiculous change and having everyone sigh in relief.
And creepily walk it forth step by step.
load more comments
(1 replies)
This isn't a win, this is Google making things shitty for the benefit of no one but themselves.
Still worse than it was before. There's no win in that
"side loading" == installing
Yes. It is the same thing. Google is just trying to gaslight people.
The square app will not run on a phone that has developer mode enabled. I turned developer mode on to disable annoying animations, so now I can't take card payments unless I carry around a second phone.
If Google goes through with this, my payment phone won't be able to run any third party apps.
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›