Google's new developer verification requirements starting September 2026 will force ALL Android app developers to register with Google - even those avoiding the Play Store entirely. F-Droid, the tr...
You guys keep misrepresenting things I disagree with and make me fact check them, then argue with me as if I’m agreeing with them.
Google isn’t killing Open Source Android apps, although it may very well kill F-Droid. Open source devs can definitely still register and provide their apps as a standalone APK.
This does open the door to Google refusing to grant an account to people they don’t like, although they haven’t done that yet, and it should be noted that as they present it once you have a dev account you can just sign as many apps as you want.
The real eff you from Google to F-Droid here is that they are presenting two types of accounts you can use for this: dev accounts, meant to publish on Google Play (although potentially you could just… not do that) and student/personal accounts that are free and they claim are meant for hobbyists. I’ve heard rumbings online about what the dividing line will be between them, so that may be a functional workaround for anybody who doesn’t want to be on Google Play, but I haven’t seen anything specific from Google on it other than “it’s coming”. It does stand out that “I’m an Open Source dev who doesn’t care about Google Play” is not part of the equation here, though, and “I’m F-Droid and I intend to build and verify a TON of apks” is also not accounted for at all.
And of course there now will be a direct paper trail between any signed app and an organization or individual, which is a legal liability issue for a number of app developers. At least on phones. Non-Google certified devices (think Android SBCs and handhelds) should still be able to load unsigned APKs, although those are residual.
I mean, that’s all really bad. Why do we need the hyperbolic “Google is killing Open Source” framing? The real thing is bad enough and it doesn’t make me show up to argue about it. Plus you could have accurately stated “Google kills anonymous apps, threatening alternate app stores” and that would have been 100% accurate and just as horrifying.
“Google refusing to grant an account to people they don’t like, although they haven’t done that yet”
I have no trust that they will play honest or cleanly with that. Google has a knack for banning accounts randomly, and that’s a ban for everything, gmail, YouTube, AdSense. Now give them a reason to ban me for any of the apps I choose to sign. Created an app for tracking ICE agents? Good bye gmail account. A VPN app to circumvent porn bans and the government said that’s a no-no? No, more account for you.
I have no patience for slippery slope arguments to justify poor reporting or misinformation.
For what it’s worth, I do think there is a slippery slope and it’s reasonable to expect things to tighten down the line without regulatory intervention.
But that doesn’t matter, because this is bad even if nothing like that happens down the line, and even if Google can’t be trusted the coverage is misrepresenting the issue.
I’m with you on the misinformation bit. But while it wouldn’t be honest to report that Google is restricting developers now, I think it’s absolutely fair to criticise and react to them building the scaffolding for such abuse down the line.
Like the UK isn’t outright banning websites promoting trans rights or other “undesirable” political movements, but they now have the technical and legislative tools to easily expand on it.
I’m not equating the two, and I agree it’s important to differentiate between what’s currently happening and what could be.
It is absolutely fair to criticise them for the stuff they are actually doing, yes.
That’s why I wrote:
I mean, that’s all really bad. Why do we need the hyperbolic “Google is killing Open Source” framing? The real thing is bad enough and it doesn’t make me show up to argue about it. Plus you could have accurately stated “Google kills anonymous apps, threatening alternate app stores” and that would have been 100% accurate and just as horrifying.
Again, there is no need to slippery slope this crap, because it’s bad now. So why even point out how little you trust Google will do the bad thing they said they are doing for 100% real and imagine a worse thing they’ll do later, even if it’s likely that they will? All it does is invite pedants like me to argue with you, which can then be weaponized by Google to say you’re deliberately misrepresenting the issue.
FWIW, I don’t really care about downvotes either way. I am clearly not here to pander, with my “NUANCED POINT IS NUANCED, YOU NAUGHTY, NAUGHTY CHILDREN” persona.
Doesn’t seem that way anymore. Everyone is just leasing their phones. You havnt for awhile been able to do whatever you want with your phone. Otherwise we’d have more phones supporting Linux.
I know. And I didn’t defend Google’s ownership of your phone.
See how annoying that is?
The second person is rhetorical there. I’m saying whether you believe that in all caps and bold letters is entirely irrelevant to whether the video title is misrepresenting the issue.
You guys keep misrepresenting things I disagree with and make me fact check them, then argue with me as if I’m agreeing with them.
Google isn’t killing Open Source Android apps, although it may very well kill F-Droid. Open source devs can definitely still register and provide their apps as a standalone APK.
This does open the door to Google refusing to grant an account to people they don’t like, although they haven’t done that yet, and it should be noted that as they present it once you have a dev account you can just sign as many apps as you want.
The real eff you from Google to F-Droid here is that they are presenting two types of accounts you can use for this: dev accounts, meant to publish on Google Play (although potentially you could just… not do that) and student/personal accounts that are free and they claim are meant for hobbyists. I’ve heard rumbings online about what the dividing line will be between them, so that may be a functional workaround for anybody who doesn’t want to be on Google Play, but I haven’t seen anything specific from Google on it other than “it’s coming”. It does stand out that “I’m an Open Source dev who doesn’t care about Google Play” is not part of the equation here, though, and “I’m F-Droid and I intend to build and verify a TON of apks” is also not accounted for at all.
And of course there now will be a direct paper trail between any signed app and an organization or individual, which is a legal liability issue for a number of app developers. At least on phones. Non-Google certified devices (think Android SBCs and handhelds) should still be able to load unsigned APKs, although those are residual.
I mean, that’s all really bad. Why do we need the hyperbolic “Google is killing Open Source” framing? The real thing is bad enough and it doesn’t make me show up to argue about it. Plus you could have accurately stated “Google kills anonymous apps, threatening alternate app stores” and that would have been 100% accurate and just as horrifying.
let’s be real, this is entirely to kill revanced
“Google refusing to grant an account to people they don’t like, although they haven’t done that yet”
I have no trust that they will play honest or cleanly with that. Google has a knack for banning accounts randomly, and that’s a ban for everything, gmail, YouTube, AdSense. Now give them a reason to ban me for any of the apps I choose to sign. Created an app for tracking ICE agents? Good bye gmail account. A VPN app to circumvent porn bans and the government said that’s a no-no? No, more account for you.
I don’t care who you trust, honestly.
I have no patience for slippery slope arguments to justify poor reporting or misinformation.
For what it’s worth, I do think there is a slippery slope and it’s reasonable to expect things to tighten down the line without regulatory intervention.
But that doesn’t matter, because this is bad even if nothing like that happens down the line, and even if Google can’t be trusted the coverage is misrepresenting the issue.
Man, I hate the Internet.
I’m with you on the misinformation bit. But while it wouldn’t be honest to report that Google is restricting developers now, I think it’s absolutely fair to criticise and react to them building the scaffolding for such abuse down the line.
Like the UK isn’t outright banning websites promoting trans rights or other “undesirable” political movements, but they now have the technical and legislative tools to easily expand on it.
I’m not equating the two, and I agree it’s important to differentiate between what’s currently happening and what could be.
It is absolutely fair to criticise them for the stuff they are actually doing, yes.
That’s why I wrote:
Again, there is no need to slippery slope this crap, because it’s bad now. So why even point out how little you trust Google will do the bad thing they said they are doing for 100% real and imagine a worse thing they’ll do later, even if it’s likely that they will? All it does is invite pedants like me to argue with you, which can then be weaponized by Google to say you’re deliberately misrepresenting the issue.
I see you are getting some down votes, it’s not me, I swear! Your views on this are sound in my eyes.
I should have said I liked the rest of your post, it was only the bit I quoted I wanted to add in my opinion, but I kinda forgot to mention that :)
No worries, I appreciate that.
FWIW, I don’t really care about downvotes either way. I am clearly not here to pander, with my “NUANCED POINT IS NUANCED, YOU NAUGHTY, NAUGHTY CHILDREN” persona.
but app devs and users should be free to do whatever they want without anyone interrupting them.
IT’S THEIR PHONE AND NOT ANY OTHER ENTITIES’.
Doesn’t seem that way anymore. Everyone is just leasing their phones. You havnt for awhile been able to do whatever you want with your phone. Otherwise we’d have more phones supporting Linux.
Cool.
So title the video like that and don’t misrepresent it and I’ll be here agreeing with you.
“But I disagree with what Google is doing” is a non sequitur here.
wdym “title the video like that and don’t misrepresent it”?
i did not make the video
???
I know. And I didn’t defend Google’s ownership of your phone.
See how annoying that is?
The second person is rhetorical there. I’m saying whether you believe that in all caps and bold letters is entirely irrelevant to whether the video title is misrepresenting the issue.