Yeah, I was gonna say, holding Chrome OS above Windows because its Linux based is bizarre. That’s getting more true about Android, too. For all its faults, I can still say I’m the admin of my Windows OS (for now), and not Google.

That’s generally what you hear from people who have basic use cases and simply can’t fathom other people may want or need different things from their devices.

Which is fine, they don’t have to understand. If stock is good enough for them nowadays, more power to them.

What I’m sick of is the condescension. This bizarre thing where they somehow think a person wanting control over a device they paid for is worthy of derision or shame.

It’s like if someone who only checks their email on their laptop laughing at someone using a desktop for heavier work, for no real reason other than thinking using technology differently than themselves is silly.

That other comment is a perfect example, and indictive of this weird subculture in Android spaces that hates Google but seems to be drinking from the same user-hostile Kool aid.

Personally, I’m an odd case, in that I didn’t used to root or use custom ROMs at all until recent years. Basically since Android 10, simply to get around the needless roadblocks and restore the functions I want. I was fine with stock for a long time, until Google started becoming Apple.

Shit like this is why I can’t abide GrapheneOS or their cheerleaders.

It’s legitimately the same attitude as Google itself. This parental, condescending tone, acting as if wanting freedom to control their own devices is somehow irrational. Continuing to push this toxic idea that handcuffs are the only way to protect users. Like a sysadmin at a workplace, but without the justifiable reasons.

Yes they will. This tool would force users to always use the Play Store which would increase the download count on their app, which would help its ranking in the Play Store. Every last single developer is incentivized to use this.

Issue is that it is no secure.

Explain. I’m tired of hearing this boogeyman, tell me exactly how Lineage is “not secure” but Graphene is?

Then maybe give me some examples of cases where that difference has actually been a problem.

Because it feels like a lot of these “unsecure” things people hand-wring over are really just user freedoms they may use to hurt themselves, not actual vulnerabilities that can’t be avoided with common sense.

I mean, you can be as snotty about this as you like, but it doesn’t change the fact this “choice” is basically between participate in the same digital world as most people do with the most popular, most supported, and highest value apps, vs only what you can use in F Droid or something?

You’re calling them slaves but can you give them anything more appealing outside the walled garden than “privacy”? It’s not like everything on the play store has an F-Droid corollary. You’re basically telling them to dramatically reduce their own use case. Does that make them a slave?

Their reasons mean nothing. It’s my device. I shouldn’t have to worry about an application installed on my device being policed because the developer got a hair up their ass about people downgrading.

The phrase “more secure” is becoming meaningless as it keeps being used as a blanket excuse for literally every user hostile change.

Are they? Other comments in different PRs seem to indicate they have no intention of trying to subvert play integrity. Is there something more recent than this that indicates they’re trying?

For every single app where the developer tries this?

Yeah right. That’s unsustainable.

They’ll also just increase ways for the integrity to verify it hasn’t been patched. This announcement already says they’re checking the app’s binary for tampering.

Not only does it still exist, newgrounds is unique in that it is a long-running website from the early days that is still being run by the same person (never bought out or sold), still has no ads (despite funding issues), still has the same basic focus, still hosting the same content, and is still more or less exactly the same despite some UI changes.

Granted part of that is there hasn’t been any real pressure on it, but still.

Genuinely, it is the kind of thing that I would want to put behind glass, because it is an abnormality in this wasteland we call the internet. It’s this beautiful little corner that has been allowed to remain as it is, unmolested by the terrible bullshit around it.

Maybe throttled unless it passes some kind of check for being “authentic” or something. Feels like that’s the general pattern with Google now.

Hell, maybe it was related to implementing this feature. You can get parallel downloads from the store now because they changed how downloads are queued or something.

It’s mostly that it’s just an older site and the voting/review system goes back by over a decade. Much of the information you’re gonna get on there is just dated, pure and simple, and that reflects in the rankings.

And as you said, the categories aren’t curated well enough. Too many unrelated suggestions.

Only issue with alternativeto is the comments and reviews are all dated, some by over 10 years, and often don’t reflect the current state of the software.

A lot of the information on the site just feels very stale in general.

Downvotes are part of the whole curation aspect of the site, and it’s a valid part of the democratic system. For all the whining about being “censored” because you got downvoted, there’s countless cases where downvotes influence the sorting algorithm positively.

Garbage shouldn’t sit on the same level as fluff comments no one bothered to vote on.

This is more or less how it worked on Reddit. The admins handled vote spam or abuse, there was absolutely no expectation for moderators to have that information because the admins were dealing with the abuse cases. Moderators only concerned themselves with content and comments, the voting was the heart of how the whole thing works, and therefore only admins could see and affect them. Least privilege, basically.

I think a side effect of this, though, is that it increases the responsibility on admins to only federate with instances that have active and cooperative admins. It increases their responsibilities and demands active monitoring, which isn’t a bad thing, but I worry about how the instances that federates openly by default will continue to operate.

If you have to trust the admins, how do you handle new admins, or increasingly absent ones? What if their standards for what constitutes “harassment” don’t match yours? Does the whole instances get defederated? What if it’s a large instance, where communities will be cut off?

I don’t ask any of this as a way to put down this effort because I very, very much want to see this change, but there’s gonna be hurtles that have to be overcome

Ultimately I think the best solution would need assistance from the devs but I’m lieu of that, we have to make due.

Admins only. Letting mods see it just invites them to share it on a discord channel or some shit. The point is the number of people that can actually see the votes needs to be very small and trusted, and preferably tied to a internal standard for when those things need acted upon.

The inherent issue is public votes allow countless methods of interpreting that information, which can be acted on with impunity by bad actors of all kinds, from outside and within. Either by harassment or undue bans. It’s especially bad for the instances that fuck with vote counts. Both are problems.

Sure, but by the same token, mods are just as capable of manipulation and targeted harassment when they can curate the voting and react based on votes.

On reddit, votes are only visible to the admins, and the admins would take care of this type of thing when they saw it (or it tripped some kind of automated something or other). But they still had the foresight not to let moderators or users see those votes.

Complete anonymity across the board won’t work but they’re definitely needs to be something better than it is now.