aboringusername

8 ms·

1.
by aboringusername 7d ago
This is the biggest disappointment, imagine running a full blown "Ubuntu Touch" that gives you the freedom of Linux with full root access. This is the biggest failure of legislation in the 21st century so far that has enabled a st
2.
by aboringusername 18d ago
One detail that remains to be seen is whether you'll cater to the EU market, and how the impact of the memory crisis will impact the possible consumer-base. It's a weak market and sales are likely to be only the 'hardcore&#x2
3.
by aboringusername 18d ago
It's obvious they see open access to users data as a threat to their business model. No, they haven't suddenly decided to care about your privacy, they want to deny other actors access so you need to get data directly via them. Th
4.
by aboringusername 18d ago
It's funny how much Google lies about Android being 'secure' [1] and how much GrapheneOS, for free, improves the security of everyone with their work. Google should be, immediately, merging all patches/changes GrapheneOS
5.
by aboringusername 4mo ago
Well, it depends on the application and context. I don't think a homeless person at the library is going to be booking a $1000-a-night room in downtown Los Angeles. However, services that homeless people will be using should factor in
6.
by aboringusername 4mo ago
Go fuck yourself? I mean, that seems to be the general societal attitude. And you'll need to buy new ones because many things are app only, or are migrating that way (including being able to travel to certain countries)
7.
by aboringusername 4mo ago
I suppose it's now become a default assumption every customer is going to own a smart phone that complies with this requirement? It seems on iOS you'll even need to download an application, which is quite a bit of friction. In the
8.
by aboringusername 5mo ago
I don't actually see this as a problem, and instead it's a PSA everyone needs to internalize: If you put data onto a networked device it may be sent to some place else. If you don't want your data being shared: Use a device t
9.
by aboringusername 6mo ago
The reauthenticate means using device pin/biometrics if you have them enabled. You will not need a Google account.
10.
by aboringusername 6mo ago
It's not like the Google Play store hasn't been known to host malicious apps, yet you are not required to wait 24 hours before you install apps from their store. I suspect they are hoping users just give up and go to the play stor
11.
by aboringusername 7mo ago
Unfortunately that's a rather vanishingly small list now. I would not be surprised if, in a few years, these options are gone from all android devices. People mention GrapheneOS but that relies entirely on Google. Yes they are working
12.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
I'm not sure why there's a need to update anything every 2-3 years. In fact, the pace of change becomes exhausting in itself. In my day-to-day life, things are mostly well designed systems and processes; there's a stable code
13.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
Agreed. Food now is made to order, rather than being ready and waiting (likely to reduce stock waste). Last time I went there was hardly a queue, wasn't rush-hour (was quite dead actually, few staff, fewer customers). Food still took 1
14.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
This is a trend that's probably going to continue and widen the rich-poor divide. Take airlines, there's only so many seats they can offer day to day, and with planes retiring from service and new planes slow to be delivered the i
15.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
I would argue QPR updates are functionality and subject to the 6 month test. I would also argue a closed source release in August 2025 would start the first 6 month timer (February 2026) and the source code release to trigger another timer
16.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
It's a rather intriguing concept, because it can be the case that the binaries Google released in QPR1 and their source code are different in some way. OEMs must ship QPR1 as Google released publicly within 6 months. If this open-sourc
17.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
Before the EU law, Android would release monthly bulletins, and patches would take about a month before being released on Pixel devices, once known as 'best in class' security. GrapheneOS have themselves admitted this has changed
18.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
You're not reading the interpretation correctly: > at the latest 4 months after the public release of the source code of an update of the underlying operating system So if somebody reverse engineers the patch, or releases the patch
19.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
It absolutely has everything to do with this new law. For the first time, depending on when Google releases source code, or releases a Pixel update, the timer (4 months for security, 6 months functionality) starts. This has never existed be
20.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
See my comment [1]. This is already happening with security patches and GrapheneOS has already commented on their socials about the situation. It's quite bad as security patches used to take around a month, now it's around 4 month
21.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
And what does 'released' mean in this context? GrapheneOS has very publicly stated that security patches are under embargo, and they already have patches for the March 2026 release. See [1]: > 2025110800: All of the Android 16
22.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
> (c) security updates or corrective updates mentioned under point (a) need to be available to the user at the latest 4 months after the public release of the source code of an update of the underlying operating system or, if the source
23.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
Who cares? I mean, obviously this author, but pointing out "GDPR this" and "GDPR that" isn't going to make a difference or move the needle. Many companies have given up on GDPR - I've made requests and had blan
24.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
If you're wondering for a possible reason and whether google is just being "lazy", see [1]. Tl;Dr: google has certain commitments they need to make depending on when the source code is released. Expect more delays moving forw
25.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
We really need to banish the term "sideloading". Installing apps on a terminal is just that, and for as long as I remember on windows, Linux it has always been just that. Google mentions about being on a call, and being tricked in
26.
by aboringusername 10mo ago
Games publishers/developers are going to have to wind in their necks a little. Whilst memory is abundant it's also still quite expensive. We should still be aiming for efficiency and the chances are 16gb+ are in the minority here.
27.
by aboringusername 11mo ago
A great example of this is the 'networking' permission. Being able to control which app can speak to the WAN/LAN is a very important security consideration. Instead, every Android app can send any data it wants without the us
28.
by aboringusername 11mo ago
The only reason Google has decided to lock-down Android is because of apps like ICEblock and the ability for anonymous individuals to mass distribute information that governments do not like. Now, they'll be able to hunt you down by
29.
by aboringusername 11mo ago
Just reading the first correspondence from Ofcom and this section in particular: > What should I do if there is confidential information in my response? > You must provide all the information requested, even if you consider that the i
30.
by aboringusername 11mo ago
I've often wondered if there is a way you can be malicious with this, a way of 'beating' them at their own game. 1: Make random files full of absolute garbage data 2: Upload 5GB of garbage data, delete (free limit capacity) 3

More ›