Just finished a 10 hour day doing volunteer work on and related things. It is really important work, especially for @fdroidorg and more. It is quite interesting, I only wish I could get paid to do it so I could engage more. The and others would certainly welcome more input from people like me.

says the delays features by a couple months, and advises other governments not to follow the example.

bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgj9k

Perhaps. What is clear is that the DMA brings real gains in interoperability. For example, because of the DMA, now can work between and

arstechnica.com/gadgets/2025/1

I think this same pressure also got Apple to implement to provide encrypted text messages between the operating systems.

The settlement has shifted to apply globally while watering down the terms. This is worse for users without providing much in exchange. Why would accept global scope? Because it is clear that and laws like force them to open up anyway, so Google doesn't lose by agreeing to global applicability. In exchange, Google gains weakened terms in the US, which is not pursuing something like the DMA

's makes worse than iOS because Android users are Google's product. Users attention is sold to advertisers. 's business model is selling the device and integrated services, which means its users are its customers (although Apple still plays with selling their users too).

Android currently allows users to opt out of being sold by Google. Once they lock down the ecosystem, that will become less and less possible.

Wow is shameless in their attacks on the ! Yes, the affects them in ways they don't like, that's why we have the it! Then they do all this crap instead of earnestly engaging with the democratic process. And now they are lobbying to have this very popular law repealed. This just reconfirms how much the world needs to break the monopolies. They have more money than sense and are resorting to despotic tactics to protect profits.

france24.com/en/live-news/2025

's competition lawyers claim that uninstalling is the same as "disabling" even though Android itself says they are not the same:

"If you disable this app, Android and other apps may no longer function as intended. Keep in mind, you can't delete this app since it came pre-installed on your device. By disabling, you turn this app off and hide it on your device."

There is no such warning when uninstalling:

"Do you want to uninstall this app?"

presented their AI-based app review at . Many apps are falsely flagged by . Lots of trusted app developers built their reputation on free and open source software and more. These developers welcome more scrutiny on their source code. Why doesn't Google Play allow app developers to upload source code to provide more accurate reviews? How about requiring Google's own apps go through the same review?

Given that technical details are key to many of the questions of enforcement, why doesn't include technical staff in these compliance workshops? It feels to me that they want to stick strictly to an evasive legal strategy rather than constructively engage with the technical community around .

A question to about whether they could allowlist apps for sideloading they know to be legit. They punted and gave a weak attempt at a technical reason. They say their is a 100 million apps out there, so how could they ever? And malicious apps can impersonate the Application ID. Sure, true, but they could also allowlist based on all the signing keys, which cannot be simply faked and they already manage in

When does plan to fix the security issues that only affect third party browsers? is not affected by these leaks but it affects all the other browser vendors. Eg:

* Inability to tunnel like Safari does, hence protect user's privacy
* Tunnel audio/video traffic
* Stop leaking IP addresses through share sheets and WebRTC

An open call to ! The needs help evaluating 's claims. I'm going to do what I can. Anyone with knowledge of how app installation, uninstallation, sandboxing, signing, etc. could really help here. If you want to contribute, please reach out!

I think 's strategy is just wast everyone's time and delay so they can push things through the courts. Their profits on are just so vast that this approach will mean biggest profits than actually engaging with the democratic process and complying with the . It feels almost pointless listening to Apple's answers, they mostly just rehash more marketing points and waste time with blah blah.

Spyware firms like have maintained zero-click hacks to for years, mostly attacking media libraries. Since cares about privacy, why hasn't it rewritten decades old media code using modern best practices e.g memory safety?

is a great example for how not to do interop. acknowledged that and changed their malware scanning interop setup so that all scanners, including their own, no longer have highly privileged access to the operating system.

Again falsely claiming credit for bringing the app store to the . Hackers opened the iPhone before Apple did with projects like and more.

comes out fighting again, lots of stalling and pure marketing claims rather than concrete answers.

Show more
image/svg+xml Librem Chat image/svg+xml