71–80 of 90 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Graphene demands one, but you don't have to.
Sure, but then you have to run a different OS. That's completely fine of course, between Graphene, Sailfish, etc. there is a lot of interesting stuff happening.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Really bad attempt at trolling. Linux works on the fairphone. Just with proprietary and non-mainlined firmwares.
The phrase "standing on the shoulders of giants" comes to mind. So what happened here? Shouldn't there be at minimum a framework for making a camera driver? Nope. They're gluing everything together and hoping it works.. Again. This is not standing on the shoulders of those that came before. It's the same issues year over year over year. It isn't trolling, it is calling out the highly non-optimal, "reinvent the wheel…
Phones have literally never been open. Historically telecommunications has kept a tight, tight grip on everything, hardware and software included.
Even android, which is open source and based on Linux, cannot boot on any devices on earth without propriety blobs for the hardware. There is not UEFI or ACPI for phones, it doesn’t exist.
The entire history of IBM PCs and phones are just very different. This isn’t a Linux versus the rest thing. We already HAVE Linux on phones, for decades. That’s not the problem. The problem is the hardware manufactures and firmware. They absolutely will not let it go.
We saw this when Qualcomm entered the PC market. They wouldn’t upstream fuck all, and surprise surprise those chips were destined for the trash bin due to low support. That just doesn’t fly on PC, even on Windows. Say what you will about x86, intel and amd. But at least it’s an open and interoperable ecosystem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can we please not resort to personal attacks? For the record, I am not deeply invested in the project, nor in any way related to the project. As for the rest of your comment, thank you for giving your point of view. Although I don't agree, I appreciate that you took the time to explain how you came to your position. Cheers.
Why are you complaining about personal attacks when you began with an attack on a person by misinterpreting what they said and accusing them of things they didn't claim?
Everybody needs a security-hardened phone. Apple has been hardening iPhone for almost 20 years. Google has hardened Pixel from the start. This isn't specifically about GrapheneOS. Everybody should be worried, this is the kind of narrative is what drives Chat Control, etc. Security hardening (in reality) protects us against malicious apps, attackers, (to some extend) against privacy-invading apps, etc.
So, I ask you: what is the point of raising pedophiles in more than one interview when talking about security hardening?
By the way, I don't expect an answer. It's a rhetorical question. This discussion has been beaten to death. I think at this point we have to agree to disagree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but then you have to run a different OS. That's completely fine of course, between Graphene, Sailfish, etc. there is a lot of interesting stuff happening.
The most important part of Graphene for most users isn't the super security - it's that it fights for the user, not for some corporation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't have good privacy without good security
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok, I'm still curious who the audience is of websites like: https://semiconductor.samsung.com/image-sensor/
Probably just the tech press and the rare industry clients who aren't already in touch through other channels. They sure aren't selling to hobbyists. The contact data is real, but you'd have to at least look like a decent sized company to get anywhere with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most important part of Graphene for most users isn't the super security - it's that it fights for the user, not for some corporation.
Yeah, but I thing the best security is very important to the GrapheneOS developers, so I don't think they will ever compromise on MTE (except pre-Pixel 8) and a secure enclave. Of course, someone could fork GrapheneOS to support phones that don't fulfill the requirement. Also, I think fighting for the user is also true for e.g. LineageOS. As far as I know they are also a non-profit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't have good privacy without good security
[flagged]
Privacy depends on fixing widely abused privacy weaknesses by patching privacy vulnerabilities and shipping major privacy improvements. /e/ is missing many standard Android privacy patches and protections. Privacy also depends on security to avoid it being bypassed. It's also missing many of the standard Android security patches and protections. GrapheneOS preserves the baseline and makes major privacy and security improvements along with being far better at patching vulnerabilities rather than far worse.
/e/ and Fairphone don't do the bare minimum to protect user privacy and security by keeping up with updates. Both are missing crucial standard patches and protections needed against many real world adversaries including widespread privacy abuse by apps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Different priorities. GrapheneOS prioritizes very strong security (inside a very specific model that includes treating the user as an attack vector to be protected against). Fairphone prioritizes repairable hardware (and actually makes their own hardware). On a finite budget (of both money and time and people), prioritizing either one of these will undermine the other.
[flagged]
/e/ and Fairphone don't do the bare minimum to protect user privacy and security by keeping up with updates. Both are missing crucial standard patches and protections needed against many real world adversaries including widespread privacy abuse by apps.