this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2026
116 points (96.8% liked)

Technology

84255 readers
3439 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
116
Android Sideloading: New Rules, Advanced Flow & What Users Need to Know (2026) - World Today Journal (www.world-today-journal.com)
submitted 1 week ago by Itwasntme223@discuss.online to c/technology@lemmy.world
46 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

As announced a couple of weeks ago, power users always have an option to enable sideloading of unregistered APK files through an advanced flow that requires an authentication step to confirm they are taking this step of their own volition and a one-off, 24-hour waiting period to deter scammers.

Sure. That's the reason why they're introducing a 24-hour delay. Not because they want to make it miserable so people stop side loading.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tb_@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I remain as lost as I was.

The only differences I noticed are the ones google is forcing through with their new "advanced flow", but that does not constitute a "functional difference".

[–] artyom@piefed.social -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

LOL you are grasping at straws so hard and I don't know why. Of course it's functionally different. I don't know how you could possibly assemble an argument otherwise.

[–] tb_@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

For something so apparently obvious you sure seem reluctant to put it to text.

Thus far I have given you the benefit of doubt, but you have yet to come with a real argument.

I cannot, nor will I argue against what I have to imagine your opinion to be. Either say what you mean or say nothing at all. Until then your point is moot.

[–] artyom@piefed.social -2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

It's already in the text in the OP. If you can't read it or refuse to acknowledge it, me rewriting it is not going to help you.

[–] tb_@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago

Clearly we are reading different articles in that case, or I must've really missed the bit you're so staunchly referring to.
Or maybe you can, I dunno, quote whatever bit of text you're so staunchly referring to?