• 0 Posts
  • 112 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 11th, 2024

help-circle
  • Yet Myanmar ,

    Myanmar wasn’t a democracy.

    Thailand ,

    This prime minister was removed by the court, not by violence.

    Nepal , and

    This is the only example you gave of a democratically elected official who was violently overthrown. I said that if you violently overthrow a democratically elected tyrant, the majority will simply democratically install a new tyrant. That’s exactly what happened in Bangladesh, with the same party being elected after it was violently removed. Nepal seems to be a vanishingly a rare counterexample. We’ll see how long that lasts.

    Spain uprooted their oppressors violently without democracy.

    Spain also wasn’t a democracy.

    South Korea kept it’s democracy by taking the tyrant violently .

    Also removed by the court, not by rebel violence.

    It just seems the disconnect is plain old complacency.

    No, if you violently remove a democratically elected official, that official will be democratically replaced with more of the same. Violence doesn’t magically change voters’ minds to agree with you.







  • Uh, no it’s not.

    It is. As a result of the Epic Games v. Google, Android builds with the Play Store are required to allow users to install apps without any warning at all. They obviously can’t allow any app to be installed without a warning because this would be a boon to malware authors, so this is now enabled with verification. You can now even share apps you build with your friends without requiring them to go through an unverified apps flow with a scary warning. Additionally, Google is not allowed to take a revenue cut from those installs.

    You’re confused because the install process for apps that are not verified (a path that didn’t exist before at all) or installed from a system app store has changed. This now has to be done with adb, which takes effect immediately, or via an on-phone process that takes a day to complete. Once it is done, this setting is copied to new phones, so the process actually becomes easier for most people who do this because they don’t have to go through the process repeatedly.







  • pfried@reddthat.comtoPrivacy@lemmy.worlddon't let google alter the deal
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    21 days ago

    They can claim this is for security all they want, but it was announced suspiciously close to the courts ruling that Google needed to open up their ecosystem to other app stores.

    The courts ruled that users need to be able to install competing app stores without any warning, which is different from how it works today. Obviously allowing installation without any warning would be a boon to malware authors, so they added a way for third party app developers (including app store app developers) to verify themselves and distribute apps outside the Play Store without a warning on installation. Now Epic can verify with Google and distribute its app on its own website without needing to tell the user how to dismiss a scary warning, and the same is true for Safeway and Proton and other developers that might want to self distribute. On top of that, now GrapheneOS can implement its own verification system using the same OS-level APIs. Maybe app authors can distribute apps themselves for users of GrapheneOS by registering their repo with a verification system that runs an automated security audit on the repo and ensures reproducible builds.

    Now that there is a way to distribute apps safely outside the system app store, that probably prompted them to look at what was causing malware problems with the current unverified app installation flow, and they came up with that system. Saying it’s some massive conspiracy won’t force them to change their minds, especially since there aren’t enough users who care to make a dent in their revenue. Proposing a less onerous way to stop malware and bringing that in front of a judge on behalf of the app developers who are harmed will.


  • Never too late to get better at anything. I’ll give it my best shot, but if it still doesn’t make sense, ask an LLM to explain anything that doesn’t make sense, and keep digging, and you’ll know it inside and out.

    Basically, if the price was p currency units and is now 29% off, the price is now p-.29p = (1-.29)p currency units (by the distributive property). The old price is .29p currency units higher than the new price, and as a fraction of the new price, that is .29p/[(1-.29)p] higher. The p’s cancel out, so this fraction does not depend on the starting price. Write that fraction as a percent (per 100), and you get your answer.




  • pfried@reddthat.comtoPrivacy@lemmy.worlddon't let google alter the deal
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    21 days ago

    The only way it reduces security is by increasing the attack surface. There is no “now anybody can get root on your phone” vulnerability for enabling developer options, and if there were, Google would patch it. I always enable developer options as soon as I get a new device.

    Because of this, the audit described in the “Other” link is deprecated.