Alexia Aug 25, 2025
www.androidauthority.com/android-developer-verification-requirements-3590911/

I must reiterate. I really like open systems.

This is the opposite of that. It's yet more infrastructure for Google to force dependence on Google Play Services in the wider Android ecosystem.

It's also a great way to kill off a bunch of independent developers that make zero money from their project from publishing software for your platform.

This idea needs to be canned.
Google wants to make sideloading Android apps safer by verifying developers’ identities

Google wants to make sideloading safer on Android by verifiying the identities of developers who distribute apps outside the Play Store.

Android Authority
Show threadAlexia Aug 25, 2025
Software should not require permission to be written.

Software should not require permission to be distributed.

Software should not have a central entity controlling it.

The future is decentralized, fuck your centralized signature verification checks.
Show threadRyan HydeAug 26, 2025
@alexia @bigzaphod What’s cool about anarchy is that it always works because everyone is altruistic. See also libertarianism.
Show threadSean HeberAug 26, 2025
@RyanHyde @alexia it's not anarchy to want to be free to write and run software without permission. People don't need permission to write a novel or build a contraption in their garage.
Show threadRyan HydeAug 26, 2025
@bigzaphod @alexia False equivalency. Your garage contraption doesn’t have the same potential for harm as software. Your novel can never log my keystrokes.
Show threadBee O'Problem Aug 26, 2025

@RyanHyde @bigzaphod @alexia you're incorrect

A 2x4 with a nail through it can do plenty of harm and that's at the very bottom of harmful devices a determined hobbyist could make. Or, going by novels, Mein Kampf, Atlas Shrugged, Turner Diaries etc have inspired all kinds of vile people and events.

None of that justifies requiring permission and ID to access basic tools that 99.99% of people use completely innocuously.

Show threadRyan HydeAug 26, 2025

@beeoproblem @bigzaphod @alexia Buying tools is not distributing weapons. Building code is not publishing malware. You’re free to the former in both scenarios. You’re not allowed to do the latter, and someone has to be sure that’s not your aim.

There are reasons regulation exists, and while many regulations go too far, eliminating them would be worse than having them.

I encourage you to read my other responses elsewhere here. I’m not advocating for corporations to wield all the power. But I also don’t trust every random developer in the world.

Show threadRyan Hyde

@beeoproblem @bigzaphod OP asked me to get the fuck out of her replied, so this comment omits her. Please reply here if you need to continue.

Edit: pronouns

Aug 26, 2025 at 1:09amWeb
Show threadBee O'Problem Aug 26, 2025

@RyanHyde @bigzaphod if your issue is not trusting J Random Developer you already have a solution that mostly works. Get your apps from a trusted and vetted app store and never side load. You never need to trust J Ransom Dev ever again.

If one decides to forego that protection then it's on them. Google is pretending to solve a problem that barely exists likely to get around recent court rulings. If they actually cared about security they'd vet play store apps more thoroughly.

Show threadRyan HydeAug 26, 2025

@beeoproblem @bigzaphod I wholeheartedly agree that the details here are complex and the motivations are murky. The original statement that there should be no regulation in place for software distribution on a given platform is nonsense. That’s 100% of my point.

As I’ve said elsewhere, regulation and distribution should be in tension. The proper tension is super hard to achieve and often is somewhat out of balance, but getting pissed like OP and saying there should be no regulation at all is a very problematic overreaction that would obviously invite more harm that the current system in the marketplace of software distribution.