The implication in the blog post that Google developers somehow “overlooked” or “misunderstood” important use cases here, and if only they were informed about them they would reconsider, is frankly insulting.

▲

light_hue_1 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Every single time any story has the words "Google developers" in it, they're behaving like arrogant, disconnected, anti-consumer jerks. From constant GCP breakage, to not acknowledging obvious Android bugs, to intentionally braking Chrome. It's a stark contrast to behind the scenes interactions with them.

▲

lII1lIlI11ll 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Yeah, my favorite one is how Chrome users are not smart enough to handle case-aware web-page search toggle. Although to be fair their Chrome team is very arrogant even by Google standards.

▲

izacus 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

lII1lIlI11ll 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You keep spamming variations of this comment without explaining how could apps actually bypass security without several steps that the user needs to take in order for it to work. Are you just farming down votes for some weird reason or will you finally get to the technical details instead of one-sentence snarks?

	▲	izacus 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The linked bug explains exactly how. The fact that you angrily slam downvotes when you hear something doesn't like doesn't make it "farming", just like rage and rants and bizarre accusations of conspiracy in this comment thread won't change the underlying issues that this is going to fix.

▲

TeMPOraL 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You forgot to ask yourself whose interests are being secured, and who/what is the threat being secured from.

Security is not an unqualified good. It's just mechanism of control.

	▲	izacus 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		The users.

▲

userbinator 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm sure Google considers users having freedom to be a "severe security issue." /s