Tbh I do not think the idea is to "police" you, I do believe he means to show that "side load apps" is a corporate speech to say "don't do this, but we allow it". However it's literally just installing software.
Let's apply the "side load" apps logic to Desktop applications, imagine you have to pass for an entire process just to install an app you downloaded?
When you jay walk you take the risk of being hit by a car, causing injuries to you, to the driver, and to other nearby people.
So I don't understand your analogy? Are you suggesting that pedestrians own the streets and should do what they please, as users own their phone and should have the right to do as they please? Or something else?
The term jaywalking was invented (or possibly hijacked) by automotive lobbyists as part of a campaign in 1910s and 1920s to convince the public and the lawmakers that crossing streets outside designated points is bad and should be made illegal. Before then, it was generally considered basic human right to walk anywhere on a street. Whether you agree that jaywalking is bad or not, that's the history of the term.
Grandparent is saying that the term sideloading was invented in a similar fashion to delegitimize a previously completely normal way to use an electronic device.
"Jaywalking" is one of those things that's uniquely American. Most other countries have realized that the risk of being hit by a car is its own deterrent. Or restrict the legal ban on crossing to highways, not all streets.
The UK Highway Code has a RFC-like use of MUST/SHOULD; MUST parts are legally binding, the parts relating to pedestrians are SHOULD.
Jaywalking is only illegal if there's a crossing less than 50m away. (And even then it's only a misdemeanor, not a crime).
That also means that city planners have to balance between people jaywalking, putting crossings everywhere, and how crossings slow down traffic.
And every time a car makes a turn, pedestrians automatically have priority. Which creates an implicit zebra crossing.
The only roads exempt from this are autobahn/motorways. These are by law prohibited from having direct access to anything.
That's IMO also a way for the US to get out of its current situation. Set up a rule like that, with a large distance at the beginning, and slowly reduce it over the next few years, forcing local planners to introduce additional crossings, which also reduces through traffic. The separation of streets vs autobahn also mostly prevents stroads.
> And every time a car makes a turn, pedestrians automatically have priority. Which creates an implicit zebra crossing.
Only for turning traffic, though, i.e. as a pedestrian you still need to yield to traffic coming from the side street. There was some talk of having pedestrians participate more fully in right-of-way-rules, too, i.e. if the side street has a yield/stop sign, traffic would have to yield to crossing pedestrians, too, but so far that idea didn't get anywhere.
I believe most jurisdictions in the US have largely the same framework. At least everywhere I've lived all street corners were implicit pedestrian crossings with a legal requirement (often blatantly ignored) that vehicles yield. Similarly jaywalking is a misdemeanor and only applies within a certain distance of a crossing.
The only situations where it's enforced (from what I've seen so obviously biased) is major highways, city streets with dense traffic and a marked crossing within half a block, and when they want to search someone for contraband. In the latter case it's just an excuse to stop and harass you in the hopes they will manage to generate sufficient articulable suspicion to justify a search.
Yeah, I'm willing to use my brain and look at incoming cars and just walk when it's empty and safe to do so? Where's the problem in that? I have eyes and can judge distance and speed?
Yeah. Computing freedom to have a root shell and do as I please is the entire reason I put up with Android. Google is positioning Android to just be nothing more than a worse iOS. There's pretty much no point to it anymore.
Same. If Google does this, my next phone will be an iPhone. Freedom is the only reason to put up with Android's shittiness. If they turn it into a walled garden, then we'll choose the better kept garden and it sure as hell isn't Google's.
GrapheneOS is Android's last hope. They're making great progress with deals with smartphone manufacturers. However, the threat of remote attestation looms eternal. I have essential apps that I cannot afford to lose and if they refuse to work on a non-Google phone the usefulness of GrapheneOS is severely degraded.
If attestation ever became ubiquitous the difference between iOS and Android would cease to exist for me. I'd need a black box that lived in a desk drawer for interfacing with specific services and otherwise I'd cart around a camera in my pocket that happened to double as a linux tablet.
No, the solution is having a linux micro-computer. You buy an iPhone shitphone to do banking and whatnot, and never touch it, then just do everything you need off a retroconsole since it runs literally 120% of the other apps a phone would.
Yeah, some bits (parts of the GUI & some of the default apps) are still closed.
But I think there is a good chance they will finally open those now - never really made any sense to keep them closed and preventing the community from contributing. Rumors had it it was due to non-cooperative investors.
Not Jolla is finally independent again, so at least in theory they can finally do the right thing. :)
I switched from iOS to Android about three years ago. I saved all the APKs for everything I installed (or updated) on that first phone. When I got a new phone last fall it was pleasantly like getting a new PC. I imported my SMS and contacts from my last backup (taken with an open source took I'd installed from an APK), then installed all the apps I use and imported or manually set any settings I wanted to customize.
Every non-stock app on my phone was installed from an APK directly downloaded from the manufacturer or open source developer's site / Github releases. I've never had a Google Play account and have never used any Android "app store".
The biggest pain was having to manually logon the couple of sites I allow to keep persistent cookies since device owners aren't allowed to just import/export cookies from mobile Chrome.
It has been a very nice experience. I appreciate the feeling of sovereignty and ownership of my device (even though it does have a locked bootloader and I don't actually have root).
I did something similar. Wanted a Pixel with Graphene OS but the screen hurt my eyes. Went with a Motorola with an IPS screen. Uninstalled or disabled all the crap. Never logged into Google. Went with Obtanium and F-Droid for most software. Aurora for a couple of apps that were only on the Play Store. Used NetGuard with a whitelist to lock it all down.
After all that was done, the phone felt like mine in a way that my iPhone doesn't. Was a good feeling. With luck, the Motorola + Graphene partnership will produce phones with screens better than the Pixel and I can keep doing this.
I ended up with a Motorola phone, too (albeit with an AMOLED screen so not the model you have). I got hooked on Motorola phones because of the "chop/chop" flashlight gesture. I don't think I can use a phone without that gesture ever again! >smile<
I'm hopeful, too, re: Motorola + Graphene. I wanted to use Graphene last fall wehn I got the new phone but I was committed to not giving Google any money.
It may be worth checking Motorola's OLED models in person (for example the Razr Fold, Razr Ultra and Signature) so see if their Flicker Prevention mode helps. I don't think any IPS models are likely to be supported in the first wave/generation of supported devices in 2027.
I have a Razr 2024 with the pOLED screen. It's bearable with Flicker Protection on, though not nearly as comfortable as an IPS. Heard good things about their AMOLED so will give it a chance if they don't support Graphene on an IPS model.
