| ▲ | silver_sun 14 hours ago |
| It's a little inconvenient for someone setting up a new phone to have to wait a full day to install unregistered apps. But while I can't speak for others, it's a price I'm personally willing to pay to make the types of scams they mention much less effective. The perfect is the enemy of the good. |
|
| ▲ | Evidlo 13 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| How would you feel about needing to wait 24 hours to visit an "unapproved" website on your phone? You would pay Google/Apple $25 to get whitelisted so people can browse to your personal website without getting a scary security message. This is the same thing since it applies to all apps, not just apps that need special permissions. |
| |
| ▲ | silver_sun 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't think it's fair to extend the analogy to what amounts to censorship of websites since that's not the system they're proposing. Also isn't the owner of a website already identifying themselves when they register their domain name and/or rent a server? I think this is not the same as downloading an app by an unknown developer. From the article I understood this to be a one-time delay, as opposed to having to go through the same waiting process for every single "unlicensed" app I want to install (which I would not accept). I'm just waiting 24 hours once to permanently change my device into a mode where I can install any app I like without any restrictions/delays whatsoever. |
|
|
| ▲ | nullc 13 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| On what basis do you believe that it will meaningfully reduce the dollars lost or persons harmed by fraud, as opposed to simple shuffling around the exact means used? |
| |
| ▲ | silver_sun 9 hours ago | parent [-] | | Well maybe nothing ultimately changes. Maybe we end up in a world where Android users have to wait 24 hours to change a setting so that their devices will install any apps they want, from then on with no further delays. But this seems to me like a relatively low cost for a potentially huge benefit for victims. |
|