221–230 of 343 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Immature maybe Yeah, that’s the issue. I don’t want people who behave immaturely, impulsively, or vindictively, having a key role in something as important as my phone os. I want stability, maturity, and thoughtfulness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My gut feel is that Micay is genuine, and obviously also very defensive. At least some of the defensiveness is warranted. Maybe most of it. Regardless, it comes across in most GrapheneOS communications, and it's sometimes counterproductive. A related issue, which I'm sure Micay can appreciate, is that users of GrapheneOS tend to be cautious, and increasingly will want to know why the project should be trusted, now th…
All of the defensiveness is warranted. They speak neutrally and objectively. The project is not going to relinquish control to any 3rd party. Not even the Motorola partnership is given control over the GOS project. The hypothetical you describe is not possible by design. The GOS project takes no issue with critical thinking, and encourages it. But that is often used as an excuse to handwave attacks. There is a very b…
Responding to attacks so defensively is almost alway a bad look for organizations. They could really use a PR person with a more measured voice that corrects facts and projects confidence, and does not convey victimhood, insecurity or defensiveness. Take a look at the tone of press releases issued by companies when some tech press bozo writes a hit piece on them, for good examples of dealing with people attacking you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
GrapheneOSs posts are made to combat misinformation. Drawing public attention from those who may be misled and put at risk is how one combats misinfo. Its not ranting and its not somehow unreasonable to defend oneself.
Your entire comment history on HN exists across two separate posts about GrapheneOS. You're not a community member, you're an astroturfer.
I am an active chatroom member, and many people see me there on a regular basis. I choose to volunteer my time, and am not paid or compensated in any form.
P.S. I avoided making any statements about what I personally think about Micay and the GOS team's behaviour above because I don't use it and have never looked into it before reading this article, but from looking at the comments, the WIRED article, the forum thread linked in this post, and some cursory research, it just seems like they are a popular software project that is at odds with many powerful actors with obvious motivations against their existence and popularity - if they are constantly combative online instead of being friendly, don't you think part or all of it may be because they have to defend themselves against attacks instead of having the freedom to be friendly like say SQLite/FFMPEG/Rust/other free software projects? I'm admittedly new to HN but this entitlement and refusal to empathise with the people giving you free shit seems insanely out of character
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They "handle the business" while someone else does 99% of the actual work, then ask to split 50/50. As a response, Micay decided to destroy the update signing keys for all the CopperheadOS devices out in the wild. Resulting in financial damages to Donaldson. Hardly a level-headed response, even if you disagree about the financial share of something.
That is a perfectly level-headed response. Signing keys must be protected. In the event of a hostile takeover, where a malicious party seeks to compromise the privacy and security of your userbase, destroying the keys is a sensible decision. Failure to do so, and successful compromise of the keys, will let the malicious party push whatever update they want, and it will be accepted due to being signed correctly. It wa…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Immature maybe Yeah, that’s the issue. I don’t want people who behave immaturely, impulsively, or vindictively, having a key role in something as important as my phone os. I want stability, maturity, and thoughtfulness.
That is what CopperheadOS, and now GrapheneOS, provides. Its a level of "battle tested" that most OS and app devs never have the opportunity to have. Deleting the signing keys during a hostile takeover attempt rather than submitting to pressure or greed is an amazing quality that is rare to find.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
> Immature maybe Yeah, that’s the issue. I don’t want people who behave immaturely, impulsively, or vindictively, having a key role in something as important as my phone os. I want stability, maturity, and thoughtfulness.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mental health and wellness issues in high tech research and development are everywhere. I would suggest that you focus on the product and what it can/cannot do for you.
Suggest away. It’s still a factor in my decision making, because if I can’t trust the developers to behave well, i can’t trust the product to continue to do what it says it can do for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My gut feel is that Micay is genuine, and obviously also very defensive. At least some of the defensiveness is warranted. Maybe most of it. Regardless, it comes across in most GrapheneOS communications, and it's sometimes counterproductive. A related issue, which I'm sure Micay can appreciate, is that users of GrapheneOS tend to be cautious, and increasingly will want to know why the project should be trusted, now th…
All of the defensiveness is warranted. They speak neutrally and objectively. The project is not going to relinquish control to any 3rd party. Not even the Motorola partnership is given control over the GOS project. The hypothetical you describe is not possible by design. The GOS project takes no issue with critical thinking, and encourages it. But that is often used as an excuse to handwave attacks. There is a very b…
Is there an authoritative source of information about how a takeover like that isn't possible by design, which people can verify, analyze, hold parties accountable for the pieces that require it, etc.?