- cross-posted to:
- fdroid@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- fdroid@lemmy.ml
cross-posted from: https://r.nf/post/1771956
Thoughts?
- ExtremeDullard ( @ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org ) English106•1 month ago
Paid apps: no problem. If it’s good, I’ll pay.
Subscription: maybe, if it’s worth it.
Ads: F-Droid can fuck right off. If they do that, they’d be a miserable bunch of sellouts.
- sovietknuckles[they] ( @sovietknuckles@lemmy.ml ) English14•1 month ago
If they were talking about Privacy-Preserving Attribution like Firefox is experimenting with supporting on MDN, that would be one thing, but it doesn’t sound like that’s what F-Droid is talking about.
Not only are privacy and data protection founding principles for both Mobifree and F-Droid, the use of tracking-based in-app advertising poses a moral dilemma as well. If someone wants to gain access to an app, but does not have the financial means to purchase it, they can use it at a different kind of price - their user data.
F-Droid is also considering ads that contain no tracking, which removes that moral dillema, IMO:
It should be mentioned that it is possible to include in-app advertising without user tracking. However the lead conversion ratio drops dramatically, so the efficacy of this approach is not nearly as high.
That’s basically what PPA is, advertising without tracking. If advertisers want to pay for it, then great.
Edit: Downvoting without responding like
- ExtremeDullard ( @ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org ) English16•1 month ago
F-Droid is also considering ads that contain no tracking, which removes that moral dillema, IMO:
You assume everybody is okay with ads.
I’m not. My brainspace has been highjacked since I was a little kid by stupid advertisers. To this day, I remember ads for products that have disappeared decades ago and that I never gave a shit about at any point in my life.
Why are advertisers allowed to force their shit into my head?
I hate ads. I’m utterly intolerant of advertising. I hate the tracking and the malware that come with ads, but I hate ads even more. There are no moral ads. The advertisement industry is a despicable leech that needs to die.
If F-Droid springs this shit on me, I swear to god I’m gonna start having murderous thoughts…
- EatMyPixelDust ( @EatMyPixelDust@lemmy.blahaj.zone ) English2•1 month ago
My brainspace has been highjacked since I was a little kid by stupid advertisers. To this day, I remember ads for products that have disappeared decades ago and that I never gave a shit about at any point in my life.
Why are advertisers allowed to force their shit into my head?
I hate ads. I’m utterly intolerant of advertising.
This. So much this.
- Auli ( @Auli@lemmy.ca ) English2•1 month ago
Would you pay a monthly fee for everything? YouTube Facebook Reddit random site you visit. We would need like a found in our browser and every site you visited took there chunk out or something like that. People seem to forget this stuff costs money to run.
- ExtremeDullard ( @ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org ) English2•1 month ago
If the service is worth it and subscribing isn’t yet another opportunity to put me under surveillance - which is the main reason why, although I consume a lot of YouTube videos and I would genuinely pay Google for the service, I won’t - yes.
Hint: Facebook and Reddit aren’t worth it. If they want to exit the ad-supported business model and disappear behind a paywall, I won’t miss anything in my life.
- eco_game ( @eco_game@discuss.tchncs.de ) English6•1 month ago
The first quote is taken out of context:
Not only are privacy and data protection founding principles for both Mobifree and F-Droid, the use of tracking-based in-app advertising poses a moral dilemma as well. If someone wants to gain access to an app, but does not have the financial means to purchase it, they can use it at a different kind of price - their user data.
For me this reads as them explaining and condemning that dilemma, instead of considering it as an option for F-Droid.
- sovietknuckles[they] ( @sovietknuckles@lemmy.ml ) English4•1 month ago
Sorry, I was trying to save space, but I can see how only starting the quote in the middle of the paragraph is misleading. I edited the quote to include the context.
For me this reads as them explaining and condemning that dilemma, instead of considering it as an option for F-Droid.
IMO, it read more like acknowledging concerns around ads but not explicitly condemning it. But I’m not going to form an opinion about it until they do something, or at least make their intentions clearer.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English3•1 month ago
Because ads in Firefox went so well…
- sovietknuckles[they] ( @sovietknuckles@lemmy.ml ) English6•1 month ago
ads in Firefox
That’s a common misconception. For users like myself who use uBlock Origin, Firefox supporting PPA changes nothing at all (as pointed out by the Firefox CTO). The only users who would see an ad that uses PPA are users who would otherwise see ads that use tracking.
That is why the EFF supports it.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English0•1 month ago
That is just dancing around the issue. The problem is them turning on baked in browser advertising by default.
- sovietknuckles[they] ( @sovietknuckles@lemmy.ml ) English4•1 month ago
Again, it’s not advertising, it’s a form of privacy protection. There are no ads in Firefox, and they did not add any mechanism for tracking users, so calling it browser advertising is advertising your own technology illiteracy.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English1•1 month ago
How does it benefit me in the least?
- vomitaur ( @vomitaur@slrpnk.net ) English55•1 month ago
pretty sure the venn diagram of f-droid users and adblocking users is such a huge overlap that this may not pay off too well.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English5•1 month ago
I might uninstall F-droid today…
- Switorik ( @Switorik@lemmy.zip ) English41•1 month ago
No thank you. This is a slippery slope.
- huginn ( @huginn@feddit.it ) English10•1 month ago
If you want devs to make apps without any monetization you’re limiting the number of devs that will develop for your platform.
Free only means you only allow passion projects that people work on as a side project or only the developers rich enough to have retired already.
Nobody who is struggling to get by can spend all their time developing a free app that has 0 monetization.
So they monetize on Google Play.
If you care about breaking Google’s control of Android you should cheer on another paid marketplace, especially one out of the clutches of Amazon.
- m-p{3} ( @mp3@lemmy.ca ) English6•1 month ago
Cryptomator is available on F-Droid but you still have to purchase a license to use it, although the dev has to maintain all the licensing and payment infrastructure which can be a roadblock for some.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English5•1 month ago
Free means freedom not cost.
The problem with online payments is that they compromise privacy and require use of proprietary software and centralized servers
- jadelord ( @jadelord@discuss.tchncs.de ) English22•1 month ago
If it is a pay what you want model I am all for it. This would be similar to how elementary OS st
The problem with a fixed price is you have to always calibrate it according to the economy of the user’s geolocation. What is cheap for a person from a developed world may be unaffordable for a third world county.
- Ilandar ( @Ilandar@aussie.zone ) English21•1 month ago
I guess most won’t bother to read the full post and will instead react negatively to the title. Having read the entire thing I am fine with it and would be happy to see more direct competition for the Play Store. The ad thing is only a problem if the store doesn’t include a filter to easily hide ad-supported apps.
- scrchngwsl ( @scrchngwsl@feddit.uk ) English7•1 month ago
I guess most won’t bother to read the full post and will instead react negatively to the title.
Exactly, it talks about ads in one paragraph of a very long post, and it’s mostly to talk about all the problems that an ad revenue model has for FOSS!
Honestly people need to RTFArticle. It’s talking about the result of interviews with developers on how they would prefer to be compensated, not definitive plans for what is or is not going to be allowed in F-Droid in the future.
- watson387 ( @watson387@sopuli.xyz ) English20•1 month ago
That’ll be a big nope, thanks.
Edit: 20 years from now, FDroid will be worse than the Play store and we’ll have a “new” store that functions like FDroid does currently.
- sabreW4K3 ( @sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al ) English18•1 month ago
Apparently they don’t understand that the F in F-Droid is for FOSS.
I’m 100% all for adding a repository with paid apps, but it’s not and shouldn’t be marketed as F-Droid.
- aard ( @aard@kyu.de ) English16•1 month ago
Paid and FOSS are not mutually exclusive. You can always build packages yourself if you don’t want to pay. A well executed implementation might allow some projects to drop or reduce their play store efforts.
- sabreW4K3 ( @sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al ) English2•1 month ago
Paid and FOSS are mutually exclusive. Open source and FOSS aren’t.
But how, you ask? Free means having the right to do whatever you want with your copy including make copies and redistribute. Thus, how can it be free while demanding a payment before allowing usage?
That’s why I said, FOSS Droid? Nah! Open Source Droid? Knock yourself out. I’m actually looking forward to supporting some of the developers of apps I love.
- Avid Amoeba ( @avidamoeba@lemmy.ca ) English5•1 month ago
One of the things you’re free to do is pay for a copy of the binary. Therefore you haven’t shown that FOSS and paid are mutually exclusive. 😁
- sabreW4K3 ( @sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al ) English1•1 month ago
You’re right.
- folkrav ( @folkrav@lemmy.ca ) English12•1 month ago
The F stands for “free” as in “freedom”, not “free beer”.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English5•1 month ago
Stripe is not free software nor is any online payment system these days.
Not to mention online payments come at the cost of privacy
- folkrav ( @folkrav@lemmy.ca ) English2•1 month ago
Neither of your statements are antithetical to mine.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English3•1 month ago
It stands for freedom as in protecting the 4 free software freedoms.
- sabreW4K3 ( @sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al ) English1•1 month ago
- dosse91 ( @dosse91@lemmy.trippy.pizza ) English18•1 month ago
Damn, never thought I’d live to see the enshittification of F-Droid. I definitely won’t be using it anymore if this happens.
- 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘 ( @01189998819991197253@infosec.pub ) English16•1 month ago
I never expected this. What a shame.
Edit: the ads part are not an acceptable add-on for me, as someone who respects privacy and foss. I don’t know of a single foss payment processor (lmk if one exists). A lot of people here are saying “pay what you want”, but it’s that way now, with GitHub donation links; we don’t need this in the fdroid app.
- limerod ( @limerod@reddthat.com ) English5•1 month ago
They want to add paid apps where you need to make a payment before getting access to the App. It’s not the same as the current donate approach
- 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘 ( @01189998819991197253@infosec.pub ) English4•1 month ago
No, I understood what they’re trying to do. As far as I know, there are no foss payment processors, so adding a non-foss one would defy fdroid’s current foss-first approach.
Then, people on this post’s comments are saying that they would be good with a “pay what you can/want” concept, but, again, that’s already the case with donations. It’s literally how donations work.
- limerod ( @limerod@reddthat.com ) English1•1 month ago
I don’t think Fdroid is so large to be able to create something such as a Foss payment processor. If they could do that, it would be awesome.
The GNU foundation is working on GNU taler. But, it’s not adopted by any known bank, or fintech company.
Then, people on this post’s comments are saying that they would be good with a “pay what you can/want” concept, but, again, that’s already the case with donations. It’s literally how donations work.
The slight difference being its present on a source repository/website and is optional. Instead of being tightly integrated in the app like they desire.
- 𝕸𝖔𝖘𝖘 ( @01189998819991197253@infosec.pub ) English1•1 month ago
GNU Taler looks neat. Hopefully it will take off.
The optional part of the donation payments is what makes them a donation. It can be a fund page, like the buymeacoffee, if the git link is too complicated (which it can be for some).
- Zozano ( @Zozano@lemy.lol ) English11•1 month ago
Everyone here is bummed out, but fails to see the upside.
To rival the Play Store, there needs to be an alternative package manager on Android which hosts proprietary apps.
The outcome is a decrease in Googles revenue and eases the hold they have on Android as a Play Store dependant operating system.
If F-Droid didn’t step up, Epic would be the only contender to the Play Store. At least this way we know there will be some degree of democracy.
- Vittelius ( @Vittelius@feddit.org ) English9•1 month ago
I don’t even read this as allowing proprietary apps. They are investigating allowing different monetarisation methods for open source apps and building open source tooling to help with that.
- Zozano ( @Zozano@lemy.lol ) English2•1 month ago
My bad, poor choice of wording on my part.
When I’m talking about proprietary in this context, I don’t mean closed source, I mean it as in the financial sense of not being copy-left, or under any sort of licence which permits free adoption of their code.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English6•1 month ago
This is f*** up. I have no issues donating to my favorite apps. However what they are talking about it pure enshitification plus proprietary software
Also donations can absolutely work
https://blog.thunderbird.net/2023/05/thunderbird-is-thriving-our-2022-financial-report/
- jet ( @jet@hackertalks.com ) English5•1 month ago
We need a way to support foundational open source projects like browsers, a open source subscription platform might be the way.
Start off with apps that are already subscription like vpns.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English1•1 month ago
Can I just make a donation? Seriously though I don’t see why F-droid needs to offer more than a donation link. If an app wants to put a donate pop up on first launch that’s fine but don’t turn it into anticonsumer bullshit.
- jet ( @jet@hackertalks.com ) English2•1 month ago
Nothing they said was anti-consumer. They’re giving options. Software needs sustainable revenue especially if you want to break Free from Google
So if you want to do a one-time donation go for it. If you want to do a recurring donation they would enable that. You don’t have to do it
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English2•1 month ago
What purpose does ads serve to the end user? Also I don’t see any reason why F-droid should be a payment system. They should just allow donation links.
- jet ( @jet@hackertalks.com ) English3•1 month ago
Okay, it’s open source, you don’t have to use their platform. If they want to introduce some monetization stream for people you don’t have to participate. You also don’t have to be angry it exists.
- MudMan ( @MudMan@fedia.io ) 4•1 month ago
I’m not sure I can be as pliant as others here. Being less of an activist and more of a user of convenience, if I am making PayPal payments somebody better give me a reason why I’m not just using the same store that came in by default with my phone.
- Ilandar ( @Ilandar@aussie.zone ) English2•1 month ago
How much convenience do you really gain from using the Play Store instead of F-Droid? And is that convenience worth the developers of your applications receiving a smaller cut of your payment or being charged additional fees by Google? Is it worth contributing to Google’s monopoly over the Android app landscape?
- MudMan ( @MudMan@fedia.io ) 2•1 month ago
Those are all advantages for developers and activists. End users don’t care or need to care. As an end user the only reason for keeping two stores in my phone is that one does a thing the other one doesn’t, functionally. That’s why Samsung can keep putting their dumb store on their phones forever but people just don’t engage with it.
Now, unlike the Samsung store when I was on a Samsung phone, F-Droid is something I do use, because there is a clear use case there: Play for all the commercial apps, F-Droid for non-commercial alternatives and a stuff that Google doesn’t allow on Play for whatever reason.
If F-Droid wants to make a push for being my only store, they better provide all the functionality, support, variety and convenience Play does, because Play comes pre-installed. If I can’t go to F-Droid to be guaranteed to not have to deal with payments or MTX, then it better have every single thing I need. I’m talking every game, every app, every legacy piece of software. It better have the same one-click payment convenience I get from Google Pay. And it better still have a default option to search for completely free apps, or I’ll have to go find a F-Droid alternative that does that for when I want to be sure I’m not getting any hidden fees with my app.
- Ilandar ( @Ilandar@aussie.zone ) English1•1 month ago
I suppose that’s true, if you consider anything outside of your personal and immediate financial gain as “activism”. I would like to think there are more people out there who actually care about ethical consumerism and contributing to small and independent business.
If F-Droid wants to make a push for being my only store
I didn’t read anything in the post that suggests this is their strategy. F-Droid wants to support small developers and challenge Google’s monopoly in the app store space. Nowhere does it suggest they are expecting every application on the Play Store to also be available on F-Droid, so I’m not sure why you would assume that their goal here is to completely replace the Play Store. This is about competition, not market domination.
- MudMan ( @MudMan@fedia.io ) 1•1 month ago
To clarify, I’m making a two step argument: One, I will only install a second store on my phone if that store serves a specific use case I don’t get from the first one (which is Play by default, since it comes preinstalled). Two, if F-Droid is going to sacrifice the clear message that it’s the place for noncommercial apps, then it must carry the same apps Play does, it needs to carry ALL of them so I can make it my default store.
So I understand what you’re saying, my point is that this is not a viable value proposition for me. F-Droid is positioned as the safe place for noncommercial software. If it’s no longer going to be that, then it’s picking the same fight with Google Play that the Samsung or Amazon stores do, and it’s just as likely to lose that fight. The reason it isn’t doing that at the moment isn’t its moral high ground, it’s that it has a clear position that doesn’t overlap with Play’s: noncommercial software.
- Ilandar ( @Ilandar@aussie.zone ) English1•1 month ago
I’m not sure why you think F-Droid is moving away from supporting FOSS software, though. The post made it pretty clear this is about allowing greater freedom for those developers who want to sell or monetise their work. Nowhere does it state or suggest that F-Droid will only feature paid or proprietary apps going forward. As I said in another comment, if there are filters within the F-Droid app store then there is no reason to be concerned by this news. This isn’t an all-or-nothing situation where F-Droid has to sacrifice all of the things that make it great to become a direct competitor to the Play Store.
- MudMan ( @MudMan@fedia.io ) 1•1 month ago
I think this train of thought fundamentally misunderstands how usability works and how positioning works. But hey, I don’t own this, I don’t have a stake on this and I already have F-Droid installed. At a glance it seems like a bad move that makes a thing I use less useful and more like a bunch of things I don’t use. We’ll see where it goes.
- Ilandar ( @Ilandar@aussie.zone ) English1•1 month ago
I think this train of thought fundamentally misunderstands how usability works and how positioning works.
How so? You seem to be making a lot of assumptions about the intentions of the project without citing anything from the post itself.
- leaky_shower_thought ( @leaky_shower_thought@feddit.nl ) English4•1 month ago
i am good with the subscription and pay once approaches they mentioned.
the iffy portion is the in-app payment sdk. i hope f-droid will be the one providing those to have it standardized.
in-app ads are kinda okay. i won’t use said app, but if f-droid labels apps like those as how it labels apps with non-foss/features-you-may-not-like, it should be okay.
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English5•1 month ago
In app ads are very much not ok as they are often targeted and serve no benefit to the user. I have no issue with a donate button popup with a link but we already have Google play for spyware.
- yuuunikki ( @yuuunikki@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English4•1 month ago
If anything this would just give me suggestions on apks of paid apps to sideload for free
- Possibly linux ( @possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ) English3•1 month ago
It should uphold free software and user freedom. If an app developer chooses to abuse user freedom the app should be pulled (and possibly forked) like Simple model tools.