TheChargedCreeper864

There already exists a "Google Play licence check" permission apps can use to verify whether or not the app has been bought on a Google account that's present on the device.

If people can crack the app to remove this (which is a thing for some of the popular apps), they'll also figure out how to patch this out. This is strictly useful for free apps, and only serves to make it unviable to distribute verifiably clean apk's outside of Google Play (so rip APKMirror)

It isn't. I've personally had it happen where a relative who went to some country that bans video calling and VoIP (except for the unencrypted/honey pots of course) and used Signal to call people back home (only because I told them it would be unblocked due to censorship circumvention). Despite everyone in my household being familiar with WhatsApp, I was the only who did video calls with them and had to share my device so others could also call them. Even when I'd set up Signal on one of their devices, they still complained it was to difficult to use, insisted I'd uninstall it when the trip was over and used it a grand total of once.

I honestly think it's partly to do with the nerd factor. This same relative turned out to also have installed the backdoored unencrypted app to chat with others, but hid it from us due to me being vocal about not using that. These other households, also WhatsApp based, managed to install, sign up and use that just fine. They also couldn't be bothered to set up Signal for some reason, yet gladly accepted the suggestion to use the honey pot.
I think that these people in my circle don't care about security at all and only care about the platform. If it's "secure", "private" and "censorship resistant" and they haven't heard of it until I, the "techie", explain the technological benefits of it, they'll think it's a niche "techie" thing they're not nerdy enough to understand. If I get them to use it, they'll keep thinking this whenever something is slightly different than WhatsApp and be frustrated. Meanwhile they can get behind the honey pot because "WhatsApp doesn't work there, this is just what people in that country use". It appears normal because "normal people" use it all the time, and they'll solve any inconvenience themselves because "normal people (can) use this, and I'm normal too".

Any and all personal gain becomes mutual gain.

• If you don't intend to cheat anyone, the party you're interacting with gains in a similar "amount" as you
• If you achieve personal gain at the cost of someone else, their net gain will be even greater than yours
• In case there's no direct party you're interacting with while gaining (such as you running a red light when no one's around to be inconvenienced), society as a whole gains

The Netherlands only remains "neutral" because of the clause that forces companies to detect unknown CSAM and/or "grooming" material (last time I checked). It's only a matter of one or two countries that can make the difference, with most neutral countries probably having similarly "minor" objections.

It could've been. You and me probably would've blocked ads regardless of their content for various reasons, but I'd imagine that Google wouldn't have reached this critical mass prompting this scheme if their ads were properly vetted.

The technologically literate capable of installing ad blockers are the minority, and those who'd do it out of principle are a smaller subset of those

Firefox is looking to implement Manifest V3 to keep extension feature parity with Chromium, but their version will not ban the one API that adblockers use. So Firefox will eventually be V3 compliant

Idk why, but this is the hardest I've laughed at an internet post in a long time

The app doesn't even come with any removed channels?! What's next, ban VLC because it can play illegal videos? Ban Windows because it can connect to the internet and play pirated streams? Ban eyesight because you can watch an unlicensed broadcast? Removed politicians

Deliberately broken by default?

Years ago I used to use an app called "AdSkip" or something along those lines that used the accessibility API to automatically mute and skip all YouTube ads. I'd imagine the screen black-out would be trivial to add on top

On my Android 13 device browsers save in sd card/Android/data/com.my.browser. This folder can only be accessed on the default, hidden file manager or on a PC. Not even read-only access, but straight up nothing. At this point I just don't bother directly downloading to my sd card anymore, I just download to internal storage and move it all to sd card/Downloads every so often

It took me so long to figure out what you meant about accounts and stuff until I remembered you were talking about your own product. I get it now. Do you think it's a similar situation here, where the site is reliant on these third-party cookies to function at all?