Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    Uncomfortable Questions About Android Developer Verification

    (commonsware.com)
    400 points ingve | 13 comments | 27 Aug 25 05:14 UTC | HN request time: 0.712s | source | bottom
    1. extropic-engine ◴[27 Aug 25 06:06 UTC] No.45035954[source]▶
    It is if the laws are fascist. Which is currently the case, and is the example given in the article.
    2. userbinator ◴[27 Aug 25 06:07 UTC] No.45035961[source]▶
    "If you outlaw freedom, only outlaws will have freedom."
    replies(1): >>45036798 #
    3. XorNot ◴[27 Aug 25 06:07 UTC] No.45035967[source]▶
    I mean this is also an enormous problem for nations which would like to provide intelligence capability to their agents.

    A special carve out for anonymous apps only for people with government connections doesn't help because it fingerprints the operative.

    Tor was originally a deniable communications tool.

    4. yellow_lead ◴[27 Aug 25 06:10 UTC] No.45035981[source]▶
    ICEBlock isn't illegal.
    5. realusername ◴[27 Aug 25 06:11 UTC] No.45035986[source]▶
    I don't see why Google would be considered a trusted party to judge that in the first place. Regardless of what they think about this app.
    6. 47282847 ◴[27 Aug 25 06:12 UTC] No.45035990[source]▶
    History has shown time and time again that it is dangerous to centralize power into the hands of few. A lot of mechanisms have been invented and subsequently dismantled again in attempts to protect us from this. Fascism is real.
    7. aDyslecticCrow ◴[27 Aug 25 06:15 UTC] No.45036006[source]▶
    Break the law? The app mentioned isn't unlawful. Many map apps track speeding camera locations. Asking for badge numbers from a police officer is also normal.

    And why is a phone different from a computer? Nobody bats an eye when downloading program on computer, or visiting a website with arbitrary code.

    The example was recent and very clearly put the developer at personal risk. But there are many gray-zones.

    An app to decode car diagnostics codes isn't unlawful, but being personally identified could get you in alot of trouble by car companies anyway.

    And what about making an independent news app in Russia? More clearly ok by our morals and law, but very dangerous for the developer.

    replies(1): >>45036302 #
    8. 999900000999 ◴[27 Aug 25 06:21 UTC] No.45036042[source]▶
    How about it's my phone.

    It's also really stupid to drive a car in a flood, but we don't have cars check the weather forecast before starting up( maybe I shouldn't post this, might give someone some ideas).

    9. troupo ◴[27 Aug 25 06:49 UTC] No.45036229[source]▶
    > so that they can make apps to help break the law

    That's for a judge to decide, not for a supranational mega corporation.

    > For the sample app scenario you may be able to still install via adb.

    Keyword: may.

    10. danieldk ◴[27 Aug 25 06:58 UTC] No.45036302[source]▶
    Many map apps track speeding camera locations.

    Heck, even one of Google's apps tracks speeding camera locations and police: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.waze&hl=en

    11. bigstrat2003 ◴[27 Aug 25 07:31 UTC] No.45036526[source]▶
    I don't think anyone is arguing that they want app developers to break the law, but rather that Google must not take away the device owner's choice to install any app he so chooses. But even to the extent that does involve lawbreaking... yes, that's the price you have to pay for freedom. You cannot give people freedom without some people misusing it to do bad things, but that does not mean freedom should therefore be abrogated. In the extreme, you could have a very safe society without any crimes if you locked every citizen inside a small cell that they couldn't leave. But nobody, not even the most ardent tough on crime advocates, would contend that such a trade would be worth it. We all agree that some amount of criminal activity must be tolerated for the sake of living freely, then... the only question is where each person thinks that line should be drawn.
    replies(1): >>45046448 #
    12. latentsea ◴[27 Aug 25 08:11 UTC] No.45036798[source]▶
    Until they get caught.
    13. charcircuit ◴[27 Aug 25 23:13 UTC] No.45046448[source]▶
    >but rather that Google must not take away the device owner's choice to install any app he so chooses.

    This is fair to make and a better strategy. My comment was about calling out the messaging or strategy that the author went with. Choosing an idea of people should be able to decide the apps they are able to run is more agreeable of a message than a message of "think about developers who want to avoid consequences of breaking the law." The latter is an antisocial message that I do not think is as agreeable.

    >We all agree that some amount of criminal activity must be tolerated

    I don't agree with that. Especially with the upcoming rise of AI law enforcement. Much more freedom than a cell can be given while maintaining effective law enforcement.