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

Technology

74924 readers
3028 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 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day 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 1 day 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 199 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Since Google’s goal is to improve security

This is an obvious lie.

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

They never specified who’s security…

[–] espentan@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Their revenue probably felt very threatened.

[–] SCmSTR@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Whose*

Who's = who + is

Whose = an indication of possession

[–] Eggyhead@lemmings.world 1 points 22 hours ago

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

[–] k0e3@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day 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.

[–] Tollana1234567@lemmy.today 43 points 2 days ago (6 children)

they want to improve thier AI and datamining capabilities.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] ryannathans@aussie.zone 245 points 2 days 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 2 days 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 1 day 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 2 days 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] gnuplusmatt@reddthat.com 115 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm not sure why google is over engineering this, proper mainline distros have this solved since forever. Let the community setup trusted repos with gpg keys, then let me trust the repos. If Fdroid trusts the package and I trust Fdroid, who should care?

[–] olsonexi@lemmy.world 74 points 2 days ago

Because it was never actually about security to begin with. That's obviously BS. Google just wants control.

[–] Lemminary@lemmy.world 123 points 2 days ago (6 children)

Probably because they want to target software that cracks theirs to avoid ads, like ReVanced.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 49 points 2 days ago

Ding ding ding ding ding. It's so obvious, it's because Google wants to be in control and block apps it would rather not exist. Newpipe, FreeTube, Revanced and the like.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] ideonek@piefed.social 311 points 2 days ago (88 children)
[–] G3NI5Y5@piefed.social 61 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Like "Jaywalking", suddenly, walking is no longer the norm, but the car is preferred. The victims are seen as perpetrators.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 88 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (38 children)

It is, because it's actually the term that defines the process of transferring files not from an external networked device - downloading - or to an external networked device - uploading - but between two local devices - sideloading.

It's over two decades old, you downloaded an mp3 from kazaa, and then sideloaded it to your player.

For android apps, I believe the term originates from the method of using ADB to directly write the app to the phone memory, the command of which is "adb sideload filename"

load more comments (38 replies)
load more comments (86 replies)
[–] covert_czar@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

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

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

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

[–] AbidanYre@lemmy.world 218 points 3 days ago (6 children)

Since Google’s goal is to improve security

Is it though? Really?

[–] radix@lemmy.world 152 points 3 days ago

The security of their bank balance.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Ulrich@feddit.org 142 points 3 days ago (29 children)

tl;dr you can still "sideload" via adb.

This is so incredibly inconvenient as to be meaningless.

load more comments (29 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›