this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2025
519 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

74900 readers
1924 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hendrik@palaver.p3x.de 2 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

So a lot of speculation and we don't know much except 2 paragraphs in the FAQ... I'd like to mention though, they've recently stripped the Pixel devices of their status as developer devices and now push for their emulator for development. Once they follow that kind of logic, there isn't really a reason to keep ADB working as is, at least not on real devices.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 5 points 13 hours ago

they always do this to gaslight us into accepting things we would not. when blocking installs from outside gplay is a possibility, further restricting it is a relief, not the outrage it should still be.

that or they got a feel for it and decided to settle with less restriction. for now.

the permanent solution as always is deposing them from this position of enormous power and monopoly. easy said.

[–] QuestionMark@lemmy.ml 197 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Since Google’s goal is to improve security

This is an obvious lie.

[–] Eggyhead@lemmings.world 26 points 1 day ago (2 children)

They never specified who’s security…

[–] espentan@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

Their revenue probably felt very threatened.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Whose*

Who's = who + is

Whose = an indication of possession

[–] Eggyhead@lemmings.world 1 points 2 hours ago

The question is still valid, even if the meaning changes.

[–] k0e3@lemmy.ca 4 points 14 hours ago

I will always remember this grammar rule thanks to the show "Whose Line Is It Anyway?" because I would see that title every morning before school.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] covert_czar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Which means I can make an app for this "Sideloading" by shizuku..

[–] themachinestops@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

I heard of shizuku before how does it work? Does it need root?

[–] covert_czar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 4 hours ago

It uses adb

[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 243 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Call sideloading what it is, installing apps.

[–] StarMerchant938@lemmy.world 17 points 1 day ago

Found the Rossman subrsciber. 📎

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 53 points 1 day ago (3 children)

This is actually worse than integration in Play Protect which can be disabled very easily. Now you can only install unsigned apps via ADB which means just developers can do it.

[–] COASTER1921@lemmy.ml 8 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Leaving ADB open to unverified apps is more than I was expecting. ADB is reasonably straightforward to use even without actually being an Android developer.

There was never any way they'd integrate it to play protect and still allow play protect to be disabled. I prefer this to being required to use play protect personally, though the services do seem somewhat redundant. Presumably the whole point of doing this is to create an Apple style walled garden (which is of course very profitable). Google likely doesn't want to fully lock it down and risk legal trouble, they just need to make it difficult enough that the masses don't bother installing unapproved apps that may not act in Google's interests.

I still hope the EU takes legal action against this anyway.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 6 points 19 hours ago

I don't think this adds anything tbh as peoppe with adb would always be able to bypass this. The issue is that this kills distribution and thats exactly what Google wants - have full competitive control. Once they don't like your app they'll block your account and what do you do with your customer base? Give them adb install instructions? That's basically a death sentence for any app.

[–] SparroHawc@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Or anyone with a computer who installs ADB. You don't have to be a developer.

[–] drmoose@lemmy.world 7 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

Nah you can't realistically distribute your app with adb requirement. No one will bother to go through such friction.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] arararagi@ani.social 30 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And very annoying too since some government apps don't like it when you have developer mode on.

[–] Zanshi@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Not only government. I can't see my daughter's insulin pump status if I don't disable developer mode.

[–] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 3 points 22 hours ago

I believe I got a notification that it disables NFC payments when developer mode is enabled. Which I know not as many people use it in the U.S. but some do.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›