I disagreed particularly with:

Furthermore, F-Droid doesn’t enforce a minimum target SDK

While yes, this may be a bad thing for some, certain apps, like termux (terminal emulator, even lets you make a linux chroot, some ppl play games using wine in it) only work properly on sdk’s older than a certain version, since newer versions can be somewhat locked down.

I don’t want to say that that article is “google good, f droid bad”, but that’s what a lot of what it’s points are. It completely neglects to mention the downsides of google’s various security models, especially for a foss community like this one. App bundles, for instance, are secure yes. But they are also an advanced form of drm (at least when made by google), must be compiled server side for each device, and other things that make them not work for the foss community.

And criticizing f Droid because it has multiple repos? That criticism is completely incompatible with the common FLOSS ideas that things should be less centralized.

Don’t get me wrong, some of the points it brings up are valid, but they are biased, only focusing on on one side.

And I also don’t feel the need to be alarmed by these points. What does it matter that google signs everything (in a supposedly better way) when “everything” includes malware?

As usual, no app or product can replace human discernment. Security is a process, not a product.

🤡