People should be able to write software for Android, and distribute it outside Google’s Play store, without having to:
- pay Google
- give government ID to Google
- agree to Google terms and conditions
People should be able to install the software they want on their phone, from sources other than Google’s Play store, without having to jump through Google-imposed hoops.
e.g. via F-Droid.
We’ve got until September this year to stop Google squeezing the open Android ecosystem.
What do you not understand?
How’s letting Google doing this shit end up helping us ?
I think they were asking you to elaborate
@[email protected] Google has been allowed to operate this way because they are the only real alternative to Apple. If that alternative disappears, it will pressure either the community to rally and create awareness, for it to work on alternatives, or (and this is my bet) for a bigger instance like that of an EU nation or the EU itself, to step in. Since the EU is beginning to see the US threat and voices for digital sovereignty are getting louder, such a move by Google could realistically draw the attention of the EU Commission, parliament, and courts.
However, that can only happen if Google makes the mistake. If we prevent it from making the mistake, it will have moved the Overton window enough to make the situation worse than it is now, but not as bad as it could’ve been. So we’ll just end up with a worse situation and no political nor judicial attention. Google will have boiled the frog.
The short term gain of Google backing off will offset the long-term gain of a real solution.
We saw what it’s doing for Microslop with their forceful introduction of windows 11…
Thank you for elaborating
I think you make good points, but I’m still convinced pushing back is necessary. It may not be enough, but it will at least make some of our voices heard.
Then the EU has 3 options :
It does nothing because it doesn’t even think it’s a problem (e.g they seem to think this about Apple, because they do the same thing. Correct me if I’m wrong)
It tries tu regulate it, but fails because of Google’s lobbying and possibly corruption
It successfully breaks Googles fingers and gives back freedom co the consumer.
I personnally wouldn’t try to pass the breaking point hoping for the best. I’m more of a pessimist: I’d rather fight, thinking of the worst outcome but still hoping to be wrong (if that makes sense)
I think that’s a fairly good take. It’s also fairly accelerationist, rather than pushing back the other way. What about the momentum and awareness that would be gained by publicly pushing back against Google to a level to force them to recant the policy? In other words, why don’t you think an iterative approach is better than letting the bad stuff happen and then having to essentially start over, and risking all sorts of other problems?
It’s kind of like having a car with serious issues. And you either drive it until it explodes and you get in a car accident, or you pump time and money into it and fix it? Except the car is also you and you need to grow in order to learn to stop using sawdust instead of oil.