▲ 44 ▼ What do you think about Grayjay? (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by Asudox@lemmy.world to c/privacy@lemmy.ml 50 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 years ago (2 children) Shame it's not fully FOSS permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [+] drbluefall@toast.ooo 1 point 2 years ago [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent [–] amju_wolf@pawb.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) He had a sound reason why that's not the case, and that's to keep control over what people do to it. Namely they want to prevent redistribution with added trackers/ads/malware. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) Has that ever prevented people from reverse-engineering an app? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kraniax@lemmy.wtf 10 points 2 years ago no need for that! people can just take an apk and slap ads or malware on top. they do it all the time with fake candy crush apks. So I'm pretty sure they won't care about this license. I think that in this case it's just a excuse so no one is redistributing the app and they can make money from it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, but it gives them the legal avenue to go after malicious clones. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] amju_wolf@pawb.social -2 points 2 years ago (1 child) He had a sound reason why that's not the case, and that's to keep control over what people do to it. Namely they want to prevent redistribution with added trackers/ads/malware. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) Has that ever prevented people from reverse-engineering an app? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kraniax@lemmy.wtf 10 points 2 years ago no need for that! people can just take an apk and slap ads or malware on top. they do it all the time with fake candy crush apks. So I'm pretty sure they won't care about this license. I think that in this case it's just a excuse so no one is redistributing the app and they can make money from it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, but it gives them the legal avenue to go after malicious clones. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 years ago (2 children) Has that ever prevented people from reverse-engineering an app? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] kraniax@lemmy.wtf 10 points 2 years ago no need for that! people can just take an apk and slap ads or malware on top. they do it all the time with fake candy crush apks. So I'm pretty sure they won't care about this license. I think that in this case it's just a excuse so no one is redistributing the app and they can make money from it. permalink fedilink source parent [–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, but it gives them the legal avenue to go after malicious clones. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kraniax@lemmy.wtf 10 points 2 years ago no need for that! people can just take an apk and slap ads or malware on top. they do it all the time with fake candy crush apks. So I'm pretty sure they won't care about this license. I think that in this case it's just a excuse so no one is redistributing the app and they can make money from it. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago No, but it gives them the legal avenue to go after malicious clones. permalink fedilink source parent