zlacker

>>fsflov+(OP)
> In a pilot program launched in Singapore, the tech giant now blocks the installation of certain sideloaded apps—particularly those requesting sensitive permissions such as SMS access or accessibility services—if they are downloaded via web browsers, messaging apps, or file managers.

There are a lot of qualifiers on this: Only in Singapore, only on apps requesting certain permissions frequently used by scams, and only when downloaded via certain paths.

I don’t see the full details but this implies that it’s still possible for advanced users to side load whatever they want. They don’t want to make it easy for the average user to start sideloading apps that access SMS permissions or accessibility controls.

If it takes a few extra steps for the advanced user to sideload these apps that’s not really a big infringement on freedom like this purism PR piece is trying to imply. Unfortunately sideloaded apps are a problematic scam avenue for low-tech users.

> The move, developed in partnership with Singapore’s Cyber Security Agency, is designed to prevent fraud and malware-enabled scams.

This explains why it’s only in Singapore for now.

>>Aurorn+m4
I think you're dismissing legitimate concerns without fully understanding them, because through the right lens you realize how this can be anticompetitive in the mass market.

Even if some technically inclined folk can install what they want, the masses will stay in the walled garden so that Google can get their cut and exert ideological control. Even now, both Google and Apple engage in practices across their product that are designed to scare people away from third party applications. From Google's terminology when describing Google in banners as "a more secure browser" etc, to Apple requiring a secret incantation in order to run unsigned apps.

All of this kind of mind control bullshit should be eradicated via regulation. Companies should not have a license to be deceptive towards their users.

>>soulof+k7
The masses will always stay in the walled garden. It's where they want to be and they don't even realize there are walls. It is just what is for them.

>>SoftTa+te
It's a misconception that the masses want it

I don't think they cheeref at the arrival of the Microsoft Store on Windows, for example.

That's what's pushed for on the current smartphones, and they accept it; they easily don't see the problems, and it can seem complex for them to avoid it.

>>g-b-r+Jg
Other than when talking with other techies and on forums like this one I've never heard anyone complain about ads in Windows or the Microsoft Store. Again, for most people, computers and web sites and apps just are what they are. They don't even realize there's any other way.

>>SoftTa+ij
Yeah, it's like saying the masses wanted high-fructose corn syrup, or lead, or asbestos, or BPA, or CFCs, or whatever other cost-saving or profit-increasing but classist and consumer-hostile product or practice was foisted upon us and sweetened with deep propaganda and gaslighting, bankrolled by global corporate interests.