Everyone wants their phone to be just as open as their computer and without restrictions - you have that with Android. The minute apps are forced to be in a sandbox, you forgo “openness” and “choice”.
I don't think there's any relationship except an inverse one between user choice and app sandboxing.
QubesOS, Snaps, Firejail, Sandboxie, browser tabs to some extent, restrict user-freedom in only the most technical way, with no bundled choice traps. On the contrary, a good sandbox allows users to forego human curation/proprietary malware detection services and execute any code they want.
But once you have a sandbox, you limit what the app can do. Would the outspoken users on Android be happy if the sandbox for side loaded apps restricted functionality they wanted?
Yes, the issues highlighted in the thread stem not from the technical limitations of Android sandboxing but political censorship by Google. Covid-19 isn't transmitted through apps. This is a stereotypical false dilemma fallacy, where users are artificially forced to chose between security and censorship.
And government wouldn’t try even harder to censor? The big thing in the early 90s was the government going out of its way to try to force the record labels to censor hip hop groups like NWA (F the Police) , 2 Live Crew, and Ice T (Cop Killer).
Do you remember all of the moral panic about violent video games after Mortal Kombat came out?
That depends on who controls the sandbox. I certainly would like to limit what apps can do. The sandbox should give me control of the software on my device.
