u/lukmly013 š¾ (lemmy.sdf.org)Apple brings age verification to UK users in iOS 26.4 beta - Users who donāt verify their age may not be able to download or purchase apps.
9tr6gyp3The UK government is so god damn dumb.
āļø-
Trihilis
UlrichSideloading isnāt a real term - there is only loading a better OS than whatever spy-tech google is offering.
You canāt āsideloadā hardware you own - you just install whatever software you like and prefer
Jesus Tittyfucking Christ, yes it is. Iām not typing out āinstalling software from outside the Google Play Storeā every time, so you can go away.
You could go with something in between? Side loading is a loaded term created to insinuate we are doing something we shouldnāt be doing.
Yes, Apple did. Before that, it was called downloading
Once again, no they didnāt. Literally just look it up. You have the knowledge of the world at your fingertips.
The term āsideloadā was coined in the late 1990s by online storage service i-drive as an alternative means of transferring and storing computer files virtually instead of physically
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sideloading
Had I said ādownloadingā it wouldnāt have made much sense, would it?
Yep, and that definition was definitely what you meant lmfao.
Youāre obviously within spitting distance of the point, you basically spelled it out in your last sentence, just, I donāt know, reread your words slowly?
Yep, and that definition was definitely what you meant lmfao.
What difference does it make? Thats the origin of the word. Iāve provided evidence that it was not invented by Apple. Whereās your evidence?
Youāre obviously within spitting distance of the point
The point is, we have words for a reason. And thereās no reason to use 12 when I can use 1. Sorry youāre having trouble understanding that.
we have words for a reason
what difference does what I meant make?
āDownloadingā is 12 words
Ok bud, whatever you say š
listen, Iāve been in technology for a long-ass time and Iāve never heard of i-drive nor should I care about the vocabulary they use.
The first time I ever heard the term sideloading was when these mobile stores started using it to make other options sound illegitimate.
Can I ask you why Google has deliberately chosen to ALWAYS use the term sideloading? Doesnāt that seem weird for an internet company - who should know better - to not just say āinstall?ā
How do you think this came to be?
Can I ask you why Google has deliberately chosen to ALWAYS use the term
For the same reason I ALWAYS use it: Because itās shorter than āinstalling apps from outside the Google Play Storeā.
How do you think this came to be?
I literally just told you that in the comment you replied to.
I do not agree with your reasoning, tempting as it may be to believe that Google is neutral
Google is not neutral, that doesnāt mean they invented the word or that the word itself is somehow inexplicably malicious.
I donāt think they invented the word
Itās naive to think Google doesnāt have a reason behind the popularization of a term that indicates to the user theyāre not the one in ultimate control of their own personal device
Keep getting upset over it though if that makes you happy
Iāve been using the term side loading since the early late 90s/2000s for installing software or files to a device via a transfer cable. And by the time Android came along, the early app development community was using the term to push the app to your device via ADB. And from there itās expanded from transfer cable push to download and install from an unmanaged 3rd party source on a mobile computing device.
So the term has existed in some form throughout the tech/power user community before modern mobile computing. Now did Apple and Google usurp the term? Ehhh, possibly? Iāve yet to encounter somebody that uses sideloading to mean something negative, but Iām sure there is a group out there that does. Iām not convinced that group is large enough for me to stop using language I started using nearly 30 years ago to mean something specific. āWhy use more, less precise, words when this single term says it already?ā
Yea sorry but I think this misses the point entirely. No one is arguing etymology, nor does the word carry a negative connotation inherently
The issue is that using the term sideloading makes it seem like youāre doing something other than āinstalling software,ā which is truly without editorialization what is happening. Referring to it as āsideloadingā is seen widely as editorialization.
So fighting against this new understanding of the term is either pedantry for the sake of it, or you have some sort of stake in Google perhaps? Either way the worst case scenario is people use a word you donāt agree with - but the upside is someone might realize theyāre being lied to when told they donāt own their hardware and the decisions associated
So fighting against this new understanding of the term is either pedantry for the sake of it, or you have some sort of stake in Google perhaps?
Great use of a bad reason fallacy with a touch of ad hominem in an attempt to discredit.
Your claim is that the term has been used to mean something negative. You present no evidence to back this up other than your feelings.
I donāt discredit that major corporations do evil shit.
However, I presented you with the experience Iāve had with the term dating back nearly 30 years where I, and the people I talked tech with, was sideloading files onto our PDA and Rio MP3 players.
The term started out as a technical distinction in the circles I ran in (Detroit area) back then.
Aside from your feelings on the term, I see no valid justification to stop using it when Iām trying to clearly communicate something. I work in tech (and no, itās not Google or Apple. Fuck publicly traded companies) as a lead on the platform support group, and I need to be able to clearly communicate with my peers and reports. Sideload is a widely recognized term in the spaces I have worked in.
Iām not going to stop using a precise technical term because some internet strangers have unfounded negative feelings about the possible marketing connotations.
Present me with evidence that it actually means what youāre saying and maybe Iāll consider working on making the language change. Just like Iāve done with actually real problematic industry terms (master/slave, black/white lists. Etc).
Please do as you wish, Iām just happy others are getting the message. Have a great day
> canāt have apps without an account
> cave have an account without a loicense
Will this finally kill off the āApple is private enoughā mantra I always hear?
unfortunately, that is now how cults work.
Apple is doing this instead of requiring app developers to implement and maintain their own system, which is what Android is doing.
The question comes down to who trust more, any random app developer or a single entity.
For example this means meta doesnāt have to verify their iOS users because iOS already has.
Iām sure most people in this thread are coming at this all from a morally superior position about how they donāt use meta but they also donāt use iOS devices so this is another bit of outrage.
No one here is actually anything besides get upset about something that doesnāt effect them. The internet has become a silly place.
To put it simply, I do in fact care a great deal, because Android moving towards centralization from Google. Itās bad. Itās all bad.
These companies canāt be trusted with their identity, and theyāve been demonstrably untrustworthy for over a decade. Have you heard of Total Information Awareness and its spawn? PRISM? Palantir?
Mixed feelings about this.
However, ethical questions aside, and from a purely legal conformation standpoint, if the phone validates the user is over 18 and passes only that info as a token to whatever application or website requests it, then itās a good implementation. It means elimination of multiple validation requirements, minimal transfer of data to third parties, fewer sources holding personal data, etc. Whether it works that way remains to be seen.
Itās always funny when Apple fanboys try to whitewash its brand.
āApple is the most private mobile operating system there is that cares for its users that stands up to governmentsā until it doesnāt but thatās still great because it is how it is and apple has to obey laws and its fine because they hide their involvement with feds so well with marketing, and the cult accepts whatever they do, so they get a pass.
web.archive.org/ā¦/apple-admits-to-secretly-givingā¦
Have you tried not being a cult member to manufacture consent for corporations?
That or PR agencies are picking up fediverse to push people into being docile consumers.
SorteKaninpurely legal conformation standpoint
Itās still stupid even if itās required by law.
if a phone is tied to a svc acct like a telco provider- age verification should be automatic as THAT provider cannot open an acct for a child.
Iām not in favour of any of the age restriction stuff UK government is doing.
Good argument, but:
Phones in the UK can be bought without a contract and untied to any network.
Pay as you go SIM cards can be bought without a contract.
Credit cards used to make purchases online require users to be 18 or over. Debit cards on the other hand can be issued to those under 18 (but a bank account will require evidence of ID, address, age). gohenry.com/ā¦/what-age-can-you-get-a-debit-card-iā¦
can a debit card be created by someone under 18? ie does a parent have to do it then give johnny a card? can a bodega owner sell a prepaid to a minor, and can prepaids be used?
just wondering where up the chain the responsibility lies. iām all for corps being held to task, but also parents. if i handed my kid a phone it was my responsibility.
now he had phones that he acquired. i saw them. so i know it is largely irrelevant my thoughts on chain of concern.
in short: this is a terrible tar pit of gov horseshit sold in the āprotect the kidsā camp but really is ābuild a bigger fascist state dbā¦ā
Matty_rWow, thats fucked. I hope Australia doesnāt decide to do this as well. This shit is happening so quickly at the moment
Well, since Iām not doing that, that would prevent me from having to install the apps that every damned company seems to insist I install rather than having a website. Kinda makes me wish for this nonsense to come to the US.
Rimu
Sad Jim Carrey GIF - Find & Share on GIPHY
Discover & share this Sad Jim Carrey GIF with everyone you know. GIPHY is how you search, share, discover, and create GIFs.
paequ2Unfortunately, Google and Apple have crippled PWAs. Surprise, surprise. They donāt get the attention, features, or bug fixes native apps get.
But also, a lot of apps are just views into websites anyway. So I bet a lot of apps could just be PWAs.
The main hurdle is getting people to install the PWAs instead of apps. Itās a different install flow.