The move comes as Apple removed ICEBlock after direct pressure from U.S. Department of Justice officials and signals a broader crackdown on ICE-spotting apps.
It is a fairly loaded word, implying it’s an alternative method of loading data to the primary, more actively vendor-supported method. Those methods you previously mentioned are actively subverting the primary application install methods (Google Play) and are 1 minor software update from being completely axed. Name-calling an opposing “they” is not quite productive.
Sideload wasn’t loaded language before Android OS and still isn’t: it’s a bogus, overreactive claim.
All of them are valid install methods.
Developers will always need a way to load their experimental apps not yet suitable for release: they won’t block the methods they need to do that.
Clear use cases for casual users exist for
deterring them from installing software by bad actors that’s known to be malicious
verifying non-malicious software hasn’t been modified possibly maliciously before installing it.
“They” are drama-queens, because despite legitimate use cases to address actual problems posing high-cost risks to users (even as Google turns out to be a shitty authority) & clear documentation that power users can still install any package they want, they choose to catastrophize.
“They” is a pronoun. Hope that helps clear things up.
Sideload wasn’t loaded language before Android OS and still isn’t: it’s a bogus, overreactive claim.
The term “sideload” was coined by i-drive, a bunk dot-com contributor who applied to trademark the term because they were corporate ghouls. The idea behind sideloading is just transferring a fucking file. It’s loaded language, despite whatever freedom or restrictions an implementation provides. Call it what it is, a file transfer.
Clear use cases for casual users exist for
What about the clear use case for a FOSS developer who doesn’t want to go through the Google authority for validation? What happens when Google thinks an app is dangerous when it shows no clear malicious behavior? What happens when Google enforces the idea that blocking ads is malicious?
(even as Google turns out to be a shitty authority)
It is a fairly loaded word, implying it’s an alternative method of loading data to the primary, more actively vendor-supported method. Those methods you previously mentioned are actively subverting the primary application install methods (Google Play) and are 1 minor software update from being completely axed. Name-calling an opposing “they” is not quite productive.
“They” is now a dirty word?
Sideload wasn’t loaded language before Android OS and still isn’t: it’s a bogus, overreactive claim.
All of them are valid install methods. Developers will always need a way to load their experimental apps not yet suitable for release: they won’t block the methods they need to do that.
Clear use cases for casual users exist for
“They” are drama-queens, because despite legitimate use cases to address actual problems posing high-cost risks to users (even as Google turns out to be a shitty authority) & clear documentation that power users can still install any package they want, they choose to catastrophize.
“They” is a pronoun. Hope that helps clear things up.
The term “sideload” was coined by i-drive, a bunk dot-com contributor who applied to trademark the term because they were corporate ghouls. The idea behind sideloading is just transferring a fucking file. It’s loaded language, despite whatever freedom or restrictions an implementation provides. Call it what it is, a file transfer.
What about the clear use case for a FOSS developer who doesn’t want to go through the Google authority for validation? What happens when Google thinks an app is dangerous when it shows no clear malicious behavior? What happens when Google enforces the idea that blocking ads is malicious?
In my opinion, what a massive understatement.