That's a tangential issue.

1. don't force auto-updates

2. still review apps uploaded to Google Play, but don't force users to use Google Play

If the concern is what if users use an alternate source for apps and those have viruses, then.... okay. If the user wants to stay with strictly Google-vetted apps, they can. If desired, you could have an option on setup that users could choose to select that would put the device in a restricted mode that can only use apps installed from Google Play.

But the motivation here isn't just security, it's control. Google doesn't want anyone to have an Android device that is independent of Google services.

▲

MRtecno98 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> If the concern is what if users use an alternate source for apps and those have viruses, then.... okay. If the user wants to stay with strictly Google-vetted apps, they can. If desired, you could have an option on setup that users could choose to select that would put the device in a restricted mode that can only use apps installed from Google Play.

So this doesn't solve the issue pointed in the OP.

> don't force auto-updates

I'm sure everyone would love non-technical people to stay behind dozens of security patches for apps they may use everyday because they forgot to press update.

▲

8note 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I'm sure everyone would love non-technical people to stay behind dozens of security patches for apps they may use everyday because they forgot to press update.

this is identifying the tension yeah, but if a review process regularly takes weeks or months, then the security patches are still missing

▲

Forgeties79 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

>So this doesn't solve the issue pointed in the OP.

Yes it does. This is their point:

> The fact that we cannot download and install software from the internet onto our phones JUST like we can do with our computers is a symbol of our inept and ineffective politicians.

It should be as easy for me to use an alternate storefront - or download directly from a site - straight to my phone. The googleplay store, which is (somewhat) curated and (generally) "safer" can also exist. I, as a user, get to decide which path I want to take. This is literally no different from my desktop and laptop, we already live this life. MacOS allows me to download .dmg files and install (though they are admittedly getting increasingly annoying/friction-y about it) at my own risk. Why should my phone be any different? It’s a small computer. That’s it.

It’s about user choice. It’s my hardware, so I can do with it what I want so long as I’m not using it to inflict harm on others.

▲

cogman10 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> It’s my hardware

I mean, probably not technically due to some EULA you were forced to sign which says the hardware is actually Google/samsung/etc and not yours. Giving them the right to brick your phone the moment you step out of the bounds they define.

We really need some sort of open firmware legislation that mandates manufacturers of computer components need to opensource their drivers and firmware. There's no "special sauce" in that software that warrants a company being able to keep it secret. It's literally just so they can force you to purchase new devices when they get bored of supporting their old devices.

	▲	Forgeties79 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Agree, what I'm saying is "it is mine and we should treat it as mine, same as my laptop/desktop." We both agree the current status quo is not that, I'm saying what it should be.