Local, on-device apps don’t need to go through FCM or any other servers to show notifications, apps generate notifications offline.
Same goes for Signal, it doesn’t ask FCM to deliver a notification, it asks to deliver a wakeup ping, and then the Signal app gets the message and generates a notification locally.
Never used it. I just apply on a given company’s website, after finding out about the job on various job boards. I’m not even sure where LinkedIn is supposed to come into play?
I like your ideas, they would be a better replacement than just “installing”.
It is, but sadly I don’t think Android Authority and other publications will be convinced. We should still try though.
I said in my first comment it would have to be “installing from outside the Play store”, otherwise it wouldn’t have clear meaning.
Yeah exactly, and we reached all the way back to my original comment: you can’t just replace “sideloading” with “installing”, without adding additional clarification.
I’d just call all of that “installing”, “sideloading” doesn’t really make sense here. Importantly you already specified how you installed in each case, so it’s perfectly understandable whatever verb you use.
Correct, but what do you propose? In your terminology installing from the Play Store is “sideloading” and installing directly is “installing”. But surely you agree that if an article was titled “Google makes installing apps on Android harder, but sideloading will be as smooth as before”, everyone would understand the opposite of that.
Yes that’s what I’m saying, it’s “installing” regardless of where you get the app, so if an article wants to talk about something concerning installing apps from outside the Play Store, they can’t just say “installing”. That would be incorrect if the things they talk about don’t concern installing from the Play Store.
So you need a different description than just “installing”.
E.g. in this example the article title couldn’t be “installing changes are next”, it would need to be something else.
“Installing” is not a drop-in replacement for “sideloading” without changing the meaning of what you say.
Yeah, but installing from the Play Store is also installing, and “sideloading” is shorter than “installing from outside the Play store”, so I’m not sure this is a winnable fight.
Legitimate criticism aside, I found it funny they underlined “receive data from internet” among the other scary permissions.
That’s the one thing a news app presumably should be doing
Which is?
Believe it or not, you can do two things at once. Some people are interested in space, some in geology. That’s fine.
From what angle is it easy to do?
And you are telling me it’s easy to do? I can go publish a diet tracking app and Aunt Flo will happily go through this and I won’t lose customers?
That’s already the case. The new thing is that they want developers to share their ID to have their apps be installable on Android in the first place, even if they don’t use the Play Store.
Well, I agree with you, the only way to not do anything unethical is to do nothing. So my point is that it’s not really useful to deal in absolutes, it’s impossible to take a stance on everything. You don’t like AI and avoid it, that’s a respectable position. Someone else is vegan and calls you an asshole for causing the suffering of animals instead (if for the sake of the argument I assume you aren’t vegan). That doesn’t help anyone. Set your own moral compass and follow your own principles, but I don’t think it’s useful to hound other people, because there will always be reasons to do so.
And why is that a problem?
Google searches also usually generate mostly useless results, which is impossible to combat. Thankfully the person doing the search knows what they are looking for, can try different solutions, and learn from multiple results to get to a working solution.
Why do you consider AI different? Nobody is expecting it always give correct solutions, just like nobody is expecting Googling something to always give the correct solution.
I’m not saying AI is useful, but I’m saying that a tool being fallible doesn’t make it useless. So I’m wondering why do you consider AI different? If Googling is fine even though you need to checks multiple results before finding something useful, why is searching with AI held to a higher standard? Genuine question. Because I agree with your critique of AI, I just don’t agree the critique means no one should ever use it. There are much less reliable tools than AI, that are still useful at times.
I get your argument, you consider AI bad and require the use of it to be disclosed so that you can avoid it - reasonable take.
My question is, do you avoid projects that use GitHub for hosting? Because that’s supporting Microsoft, which is helping ICE kill people. So the ethical thing to do is to boycott GitHub and projects that use it.
Do you require open source projects to disclose that they use any US-made hardware or software in their development? Because taxes from the sale of them fund missiles that kill children in Iran.
What is the list of things in your mind, that a maintainer has to disclose in order for you to not consider him an asshole for not disclosing it? Surely not just AI use?
I mean, he does answer why. You can disagree about the reason but he answers your question.
You seem to be under an impression that the actual notification that you see in the notification shade of your phone must go through FCM. That is not true. There are no external services involved in generating notifications on Android, apps can just show notifications by themselves.
What FCM is used for is sending a wakeup call to an app. The naming is confusing, but the “notification service” is not sending a notification in the sense of what you see in the notification shade. It is notifying an app of an event. The app can then react in any way it wants, possibly by creating a notification for the notification shade. But the notification you see in the UI of your phone didn’t go through FCM.
And this is a completely separate thing. Yes, you can configure apps to not show details in notifications, but that has nothing to do with FCM. It only controls what the app does locally, when generating the local notification, after FCM is no longer involved (if it was involved in the first place - many notifications don’t need it, for example a notification from a timer app).
This statement is easy to disprove in another way too. FCM only supports sending up to 4KB of data, and yet you can get a notification with high resolution images. Which also shows that no, things you see in the notification didn’t have to pass through the push notification service - the local app got the data and prepared the notification by itself, possibly after being woken up to do so by FCM.