Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

55072 readers

391 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others

Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

💰 Please help cover server costs.


Ko-fi	Liberapay

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

1437

this can't be real. is it? (lemmy.ml)

submitted 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

142 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I really like JointPics: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=jp.gr.java_conf.se_3.jointpics

Unfortunately, it wasn't updated for 10 years, so it may not work for too long.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Your device isn't compatible with this version.

Bummer. Thanks for the thought, though!

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

As I said, it wasn't updated in 10 years.

HOWEVER, it doesn't mean it wouldn't actually work. Google Play store just started doing this crap based on target API version. Due to that I often search Google for apps, check results from Play Store, and try getting an APK somewhere if I find app that looks interesting. The risk of that is obvious, just like with mod apks.

Edit: In case you trust me (which you really shouldn't as I am just a stranger), I used this APK extractor: F-Droid link Github link
And uploaded the APK here: https://d.kuku.lu/ss3xcf7fe
VirusTotal report shows the hash matches already checked Joint Pics_1.2.0_Apkpure.apk so it seems unmodified by the APK extractor (well, that's what it said before my checks anyway as it uses filename from last previous check). It also came out clean, but that's not 100% to be trusted, as usual.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago

Interesting, and thank you for the additional information. I may have to check this out.