Live data from Hacker News

Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

discuss.grapheneos.org

91–100 of 343 posts

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Things aren't only bad if they're illegal. There's plenty of bad things one can do that are perfectly legal, and plenty of good things one can do that are totally illegal.

And there are legal remedies to create deterrents without a court. Boycotts, journalism or new competition.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#93
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

From a security-minded user perspective it makes sense to destroy keys when instead of a single entity I receive updates from I get another entity that is not equivalent, and half of my previous entity thinks that the other half is sus.

[flagged]

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#94
post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a personality type / disorder (pick your poison). There's no hope for change. Programming seems to attract such people, because they are fixated on being right and proving that they are right. I know a few more examples. My common sense policy is - if the software these types produce works for me, I will be using it, but I will never allow myself to be dependent on it. That kind of person will gladly burn their…

[flagged]

One common personality disorder I see is being extremely defensive when encountering any discussion of human psychology. This comes from a deep psychological fragility.

Classic OAD (Obvious Asshole Disorder)

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#96
post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Graphene is not a consumer brand and they do not intend to be a consumer brand. They do one thing: make as secure a phone OS as they can. That’s it. If you’re expecting them to do anything in a friendly way, it ain’t gonna happen, that’s not who they are or what they do. That will absolutely limit their scope and reach, but it also allows them to focus on the one thing they’re trying to do without making compromises.…

> They do one thing: make as secure a phone OS as they can. That’s it. If you’re expecting them to do anything in a friendly way, it ain’t gonna happen, that’s not who they are or what they do. These things are not mutually exclusive: You can make a great technical product while being friendly. You can make a great technical product while not being friendly. You can make a compromised or flawed technical product whil…

Actually, you can't make a great product if you've alienated your allies, because all successes are intrinsically social, from the iPhone to Python to even the processor itself.

Going it alone is that nineties libertarian romanticism, a persistent self-destructive tendency that in present market conditions is unsustainable

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally, I like that they come across as a little paranoid. That's exactly the attitude I want in the people protecting my privacy and security. I hope the developers lie awake at night, unable to fall asleep because terrified that someone somewhere is plotting to attack and exploit them

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.

Could you share a link or something about this?

> ...responding to that with sustained, coordinated attack campaigns online. That's what Micay's history is.

For the rest, in general, I'm tempted to give grapheneOS the benefit of the doubt. Running any FOSS project is hard, running it against the (implicit) wishes of OEMs/Google (who throw in things like Play Integrity) is even harder, and doing it when 3 letter agencies at the US govt actively hate you is harder still.

Being paranoid in responses to FUD campaigns isn't ideal, but save coordinated attacks, I'd say fairly understandable.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#99
post #82

The fact that graphane is getting attacked speaks enough for it's relability. First in france now in Wired. I'm more concerned that Signal incorporated in US is having easy life.

> I'm more concerned that Signal incorporated in US is having easy life.

To add - ironically, it was Durov (Telegram founder) who got arrested in Paris.

Re: Original GrapheneOS responses to WIRED fact checker

#100
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i think a lot of attention is rightly attributed to like, i dunno say tiktok/ig "influencing" and how that can send people who gain a lot of notoriety off the deep end. it absolutely has. but so do software projects. not enough people talk about how software projects also offer up a similar kind of atmosphere: you're suddenly hyperconnected with a whole bunch of humans you don't know and are receiving feedback from p…

I'm well familiar with what you're talking about. I see it in the emulation space as well. Famously so with byuu/near. We have all of the parasocial behavior from bystanders as well. Cult mentalities and hero-worship. It's quite a strange phenomenon.

Welcome to the artworld. 19th century European artist culture resurfaces. Don't cut off your ear :)
Post reply on HN