pull down to refresh
Also Jungle Francis:
Literally none of them would be able to comply (even if they wanted to, which is outrageous). This is effectively a Google ban on self-custody. My hunch is that it will get reversed or amended because it's so outright insane, and I don't rule out it having been a comms mistake.
JC is correct on this? Xitter reporting Google clarifying to JD that the rumours are not correct
Right you are:
Thanks for flagging this. Non-custodial wallets are not in scope of Google Play’s Cryptocurrency Exchanges and Software Wallets Policy. We are updating the Help Center to make this clear.
Most likely this was a trial balloon to test public response. If we hadn't raised hell immediately good chance it would go through.
As it is, this is extremely bad anyway: it'll still ban lots of useful wallets, including cashu wallets, LN wallets that use tech like cash to build up enough of a balance to open a channel, etc. etc. Even Zeus won't be allowed: they recently added cashu support.
Wait why is cashu targeted by this if it's not self-custodial?
Ecash mints are custodial. They are like banks that give you bank notes that allow you to redeem your money from the bank in the future.
So this information is... not correct?
So non-custodial wallets on Google Play, in the US and EU aren't restricted???
Looks that way, the rage have updated their view lol
hey fuck that guy and his takes
And then there's this take by @petertodd:
You are incredibly naive if you think APKs are a reliable solution to get around this.
Without political opposition, side-loading will be banned. It already isn't possible on iOS.
"Cypherpunks write code" is B.S. The real cypherpunks wrote PGP. Then sued the US govt and won.
Be aware of CIA assets manipulating online...
@BitcoinErrorLog had a low-drama take on X: