Not even a small fraction of a percentage of scams come from installing software normally, but only from Google Play store.
Not even a small fraction of a percentage of scams come from installing software normally, but only from Google Play store.
Who (besides you, dear HN reader) reads googleblog.com, androidauthority.com and other sites that discuss these topics
Is it only a small fraction of a percentage of Android users
When Google makes the obviously bogus claim that Google Play policies, e.g., "sideloaoding" restrictions, are intended to "protect users", who is it addressing. Who is the audience. Is it the "average" Android users that Google claims to be protecting. Is it the Android users who prefer F-Droid that do not need Google's "help" to avoid scams
What if Google Play policies protect Google from competition (cf. protecting users from scams) and this could have an effect on the stock price or on the profits of "app developers" or "ad tech" companies. Who would be interested in that information. Who would accept bogus claims about "protecting users" without question
> Play store is the largest distributor of spyware and viruses for Android.
I think all companies are taking part in somewhat of a double-speak. Meta is lobbying for child safety and so many other things.
I feel like they really can't come up loud and say what exact reasons they are doing this (for locking down Android) and thus have to use this as an excuse.
It's all smokescreens and mirror to a certain degree.
This change is not about stopping malware/scams. Malware/scams is just the gaslighting excuse for the change.
The actual reason for the change is to try to protect playstore profits. With the lawsuit that forced them to allow alternate "stores" they saw the money stream shrinking, and this is their attempt at propping up the money flow for as long as possible.