<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
</head>
<body>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
Ultimately, any commercial entity can do whatever they want, as long as it's not (blatantly) illegal. You have the choice to not deal with them, at least in theory.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
That theory is pretty threadbare in some cases, but that's where your only recourse is political lobbying to change the rules so they suit you better.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
My personal opinion is that privacy is an illusion and the faster you get over that, the easier your life will be. *Should* that be the case? Hell, no! But what options do I have other than how I vote, and how I communicate with my various elected representatives?</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
This isn't a technical problem. This is a social and political (and also macroeconomic) problem. There may exist technical workarounds, temporarily, as there often are, but they aren't solutions IMHO.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
In other words, go yell at your MP, not us, it'll be - microscopically - more useful in terms of long-term solutions.</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
<br>
</div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">Grumpily yours,</span></div>
<div style="color: rgb(33, 33, 33); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" dir="auto">
<span style="font-size: 12pt;">-Adam</span></div>
<div id="ms-outlook-mobile-signature" dir="auto">
<div><br>
</div>
Get <a href="https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg">Outlook for Android</a></div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%" tabindex="-1">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Roundtable <roundtable-bounces@muug.ca> on behalf of J. King <jking@jkingweb.ca><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, November 3, 2022 10:08:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Continuation of Round Table discussion <roundtable@muug.ca><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [RndTbl] On forcing people to get Google accounts</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt;">
<div class="PlainText">On November 3, 2022 9:11:05 p.m. EDT, Brian Lowe <brian2@groupbcl.ca> wrote:<br>
>A general question for the Roundtable.<br>
><br>
>Is it acceptable for Canadian companies to compel people to create an account with a giant
<br>
>user-hostile American advertising company in order to get stuff done in their lives?<br>
><br>
>I'm referring to the tendency of companies to make Android apps available only through
<br>
>Google Play. In its initial incarnation, the Android App store was free to use. If you wanted an
<br>
>app for your Android device, you simply downloaded it from the store. <br>
><br>
>No more. Now that the app store is Google Play, one /must/ create a Google account to get
<br>
>any app from it, including ones that are ostensibly "free." This requires giving Google some
<br>
>personal information, which fortunately need not be accurate. At one point I understand
<br>
>Google was requiring a valid telephone number, but that didn't happen when I signed up for a
<br>
>(throwaway) account today.<br>
><br>
>But things get worse. One cannot simply download an APK from Google Play. /The account
<br>
>must be associated with an Android device in order to install apps. /I most certainly do not
<br>
>want to add a Google account to my Android phone; I don't trust them with the additional
<br>
>information it would give them from whatever telemetry the phone is sending. In addition,
<br>
>because they're American, they're not subject to Canadian privacy laws.<br>
><br>
>The most egregious offender here is Shaw Communications. In order to make even basic
<br>
>changes to their BlueCurve modem (change the SSID or WiFi password, setup port forwarding
<br>
>or DMZ, apply parental controls, etc) one /must/ use their Shaw Home app. They offer no
<br>
>alternative.<br>
><br>
>In truth, there is an alternative: someone kindly uploaded it to apkpure.com. But that's not the
<br>
>case for my Credit Union's app: it's not on apkpure. So if I wanted to use that app, I must
<br>
>create a Google /and/ add it to my phone.<br>
><br>
>Why should I have to do that? Like I said, Google is a huge, user-hostile American advertising
<br>
>company that's not subject to Canadian privacy laws. So why is it permissible for Canadian
<br>
>companies to compel me to do business with them?<br>
><br>
<br>
If you're not worried about violating Google's terms of service you can use Aurora Store (available from F-Droid) to download and install software from Google Play without a Google account associated to you.
<br>
<br>
Obviously there's no excusing their user-hostile behaviour, but there is in fact that other option. Whether your banking software would actually work is a separate question, though, as they are, as a class, notorious for requiring SafetyNet and other proprietary
Google dross. <br>
-- <br>
J. King<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Roundtable mailing list<br>
Roundtable@muug.ca<br>
<a href="https://muug.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable">https://muug.ca/mailman/listinfo/roundtable</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</body>
</html>