Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

discuss.grapheneos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 343 posts

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#291

Post by finalst »

Georgelemental wrote: post #272
finalst wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I understand you are trying to be positive about this, I don't think it's good to want our team portrayed like this, sorry. Paranoid people are people who'd easily be influenced into doing harmful behaviors because it believes it will stop their problems. Making a response to inaccuracies and bad journalism platforming an extremely malicious actor isn't a symptom of that. We don't have people with severe mental…

There is a very broad spectrum between "completely average and neurotypical" and "severe mental illness". E.g. "slightly atypical personality". The world would be a boring place if everyone was exactly the same

I agree for sure everyone should be different and have a diversity of how peoples brains work. The same type of think puts us into a bubble. We are definitely atypical because we are developing something quite atypical as well. Coming as a project member I just sometimes see comments that call us stuff like 'schizos' or 'paranoid' even when it is intending to be positive. I guess somehow they believe someone with a severe mental issue is more likely to an adversary of the government or whatever enemy they perceive? I don't know the justification behind it. I just find that odd, we're quite ordinary people actually. I don't think it does good for mental health awareness and for people who actually have these issues to backseat diagnose how people's minds supposedly work.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#292

Post by oh_fiddlesticks »

antonvs wrote: post #274
DANmode wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good projects follow their mission statement.

Which part of the mission statement mandates publishing rants as official public communications?

It doesn't really matter, because their target audience does not care about that.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#293

Post by retrochameleon »

HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #169
toaste_ wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Louis Rossmann thinks your communication has a problem with going on rants, it must be pretty out there.

Rossmann publicly blasted a private discussion, twisting what was going on, and then lied to his own viewers. Such a claim from an identity verified kiwifarms account holder holds no weight.

[flagged]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#294

Post by [deleted] »

HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #166
busterarm wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's healthy paranoia and there's treating even casual commentary/criticism from anyone as an existential threat & coordinated attack...and responding to that with sustained, coordinated attack campaigns online. That's what Micay's history is. That's not healthy for any project.

This is false. Commentary and criticism is not treated as a coordinated attack. Coordinated attacks are treated as coordinated attacks. Criticism is often used as an excuse to try and hide attacks, and many people unfortunately cannot tell the difference.

[deleted]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#295

Post by fsflover »

oh_fiddlesticks wrote: post #292
antonvs wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part of the mission statement mandates publishing rants as official public communications?

It doesn't really matter, because their target audience does not care about that.

Yes, because such move decreases the target audience accordingly.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#296

Post by handedness »

joemazerino wrote: post #246
ysnp wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phantom Secure is directly named as one of the parties Donaldson was dealing with, with others being suspected: > Donaldson tried to make a deal with Phantom Secure, which ultimately didnt work out. Micay suspected other counterparties were linked to organized crime, but we cannot confirm those identities or ties on short notice. Donaldson began pursuing such deals before Micay left and continued afterward. https://d…

[flagged]

> ...Rossman being a Kiwifarms supporter. > > You can't believe someone who has constantly claimed things without receipts.

I had never actually visited Kiwifarms before today so I knew virtually nothing firsthand of what's actually going on there, other than hearing it repeatedly invoked in these discussions by supporters and detractors alike. A brief, cursory look turned up a dox thread thanking @larossmann for providing information.

It also turned up comments from some like, "Daniel Micay is a low-functioning cancer who should have been beaten and/or raped to death by a drunken father."

If anything, Micay appears to have been underselling things.

To be fair, it appears the project also has some supporters in that thread, and I'd have to delve further to figure out whether it's a 4chan-esque deliberate toxicity to keep the unwashed masses out, but it's not difficult to see how Micay isn't interested in dealing with Rossman. Rossman spends a lot of time knocking Micay online, but I'm not finding much in the way of even-handed coverage by Rossman from his considerable YouTube pulpit. Rossman also appears to be active on there recently. A few minutes of researching indicates a non-trivial possibility he has a role in all this and has zero desire to separate himself from it.

Many reasonable people would have zero interest engaging with someone like that, especially after they've donated money and then attached post-hoc strings to the donation.

I also saw firsthand Nick Merrill's chat behavior re: Daniel and GOS, and as one who used to contribute to both projects, I had zero qualms after that pulling all support from Calyx, which still makes me sad, as Nick at his finest was a pretty wonderful force for good. The same could be said of Rossman.

If this sort of thing doesn't at least somewhat moderate the consistent position you've held here every time GOS comes up, I don't see a way to assume good faith on your part in these threads. A number of people in these threads consistently adopt the form of making unsupported claims they could easily research before posting, and when presented with evidence to the contrary then move on to claim to be given unsatisfactory responses to their original questions and/or move the goalposts. When others eventually stop engaging, they claim the project supporters are unable to answer even their most basic questions (which have already been addressed numerous times, with citations).

It's against HN guidelines and its a pretty ignoble way to exist.

So why should we believe you over Micay, or are you willing to change your view after seeing evidence

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#297

Post by ForHackernews »

aphorism wrote: post #275
ForHackernews wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Calyx Institute and GrapheneOS are both really great projects. I support them both. I rely on products from both. You're not doing either project any favors by pretending that hastily generalizing nerd dramas and autism over-corrections is somehow a broad statement on the neutrality and objectivity of GrapheneOS's team or the high-quality product it produces. This kind of bad faith posting is bad for the whole FOSS/l…

[flagged]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#298

Post by aphorism »

ForHackernews wrote: post #297
aphorism wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calyx Institute and GrapheneOS are both really great projects. I support them both. I rely on products from both. You're not doing either project any favors by pretending that hastily generalizing nerd dramas and autism over-corrections is somehow a broad statement on the neutrality and objectivity of GrapheneOS's team or the high-quality product it produces. This kind of bad faith posting is bad for the whole FOSS/l…

[flagged]

Not a sock, just finally annoyed enough to actually login and say something.

I can see you can't engage about this without hurling wild accusations, so peace out.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#299

Post by tranq_cassowary »

retrochameleon wrote: post #293
HybridStatAnim8 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rossmann publicly blasted a private discussion, twisting what was going on, and then lied to his own viewers. Such a claim from an identity verified kiwifarms account holder holds no weight.

[flagged]

Rossman leaked private messages without properly giving background information about preceding private conversations that they had and about the circumstances that occured just before the conversation he leaked. It was very bad faith.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#300

Post by Springtime »

spring-onion wrote: post #285
Springtime wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Speaking of trust issues, Rossmann's claim he was going to stop using GrapheneOS proved to be a lie, he was caught using it for months after. He knew it was impossible for us to target him with an individual update, that didn't stop him from including that supposed fear in his sob story though. He made it sound like Daniel was going crazy on him for no apparent reason over a single comment he posted on the Techlore v…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN