←back to thread

397 points opengears | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
jasonjayr ◴[] No.41896030[source]
From the (current) final comment at https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing-android/issues/2064

> Nothing came of the discussions with google. Demands by Google for changes to get the permission granted were vague, which makes it both arduous to figure out how to address them and very unclear if whatever I do will actually lead to success. Then more unrelated work to stay on play came up (dev. verification, target API level), which among other influences finally made me realize I don't have the motivation or time anymore to play this game.

replies(1): >>41896431 #
izacus ◴[] No.41896431[source]
I don't think Google was ever buy a "I don't want to use file APIs because writing the code would be hard." excuse for a security issue. I don't know what kind of exact "discussions" were possible here for "give me access to all user data, photos and everything because I don't think I want to use SAF APIs". It's like that dude in your company that will have a meltdown in PRs over his better way instead of fixing the comments and having code submitted.

Apple won't let you write into random directories past their APIs either, just because it would be too hard to use ObjC/Swift.

replies(8): >>41896508 #>>41897183 #>>41897242 #>>41897307 #>>41897422 #>>41898178 #>>41899343 #>>41900928 #
homebrewer ◴[] No.41896508[source]
Put a lot of scary warnings around it then. It's for the user to decide if they want to take the risk or not. Google took something that solved real problems better than any alternative could, did so for many years, and destroyed it for no real reason other than to further tighten control they have of the supposedly "open" platform.
replies(4): >>41896583 #>>41896829 #>>41897279 #>>41897419 #
1. mcherm ◴[] No.41897419[source]
> for no real reason other than to further tighten control they have of the supposedly "open" platform

I think you're overlooking the obvious motivation of "maintain a lock on a substantial profit stream".

replies(1): >>41899465 #
2. gruez ◴[] No.41899465[source]
You mean google drive subscriptions? Are such revenues even "substantial"? AFAIK google makes the overwhelming majority of its revenue from ads.