I'm with Google on this one. Idiots and old people (the public) use these devices daily. These are the very same people that send money to Nigerian royalty and expect to hear back about a great reward. This is mostly a CYA move with hard data behind it. If they completely removed side load, that would be a different story.
Yeah in fact I don't really see what's new in this article except that it hints that it will allow install of software from unverified developers via big scary warnings. Which seems like an improvement from what has been announced previously that only software from verified developers would be allowed.
I already have to configure apps to allow them to install apps on my Pixel... it's like "okay yeah I want to allow F-Droid and Obtainium to install apps" done. Maybe that's not the default or something? Who on earth wants popup ads in Chrome installing shit? And why would anyone want any random app to be able to install additional apps?
You pay a cost either way: live in a world with better funded and incentivized scammers and in a community less wealthy by a corresponding amount, or have a slightly less convenient sideloading experience.
I guess if you take the old saying extremely literally, you could conclude that every fool is guaranteed to be parted with 100% of their lifetime available money regardless of what anyone else tries to do to stop that, but that’s not true – and why old sayings (with a respectable 75% of the words right) taken literally aren’t a good basis for decision-making.
These scammers are parasites on society, they add nothing while draining resources away from honest people.
If you participate in society, that net drag will affect you in subtle ways. Like if you have money invested in something, that thing doesn’t go up in value as much as it would have if x% of society isn’t simply parasitic.
Exactly. I'm sick and tired of all the apps/websites that mandate 2fa. All of that adds friction when I'm a big boy who knows how to choose secure passwords. For that matter, why even invest resources into fraud detection or law enforcement? All of that money is coming out of somewhere, and why should my tax dollars go toward catching fake nigerian princes when it's just helping idiots anyways?
I'm sympathetic to that argument, but to invoke it you have to argue why the anti-fraud measures outweigh the benefits, not just drop a link to it. Moreover that's giving too much credit to the OP, who doesn't even recognize there's some sort of a trade-off, only that "fool and their money is soon departed".
Wait a second... making a product that is safe and easy to use requires removing or mitigating potential hazards involving product. Building safeguards around a feature that can be used to hurt people in significant ways is exactly that, isn't it?
Are you responding to me? I think we agree. I'm saying that calling scam victims "stupid" and then not trying to change the product to protect them is bad.
Not at all. There are a lot of people in the world. Many of them are not nearly as interested in tech as you, or have simply not have the reason or access to learn more. That does not make them stupid.
My grandmother was tricked into buying cryptocurrency for a scam. All the apps that they used on her Android and iPhone were in the respective app stores.
Removing side loading has little to nothing to do with it from my point of view because the app stores are not doing a good job of verifying apps.
This bit of article is what I'm hopeful will happen:
> That explanation broadly matches what we’re seeing in recent versions of Google Play, where new warning messages emphasize developer verification, internet requirements, and potential risks, while still allowing users to proceed.
