• 4 Posts
  • 149 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle



  • Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.comtoPrivacy@lemmy.mlSwitched to GrapheneOS today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    That’s fair, and the reasons why someone buys a phone is a personal choice.

    I would suggest with things like a headphone jack that, while its annoying to buy an adapter (usb-c to headphone) it may be worth the cost vs sacrificing something like hardware security.

    Sadly a lot of the time consumers are forced to choose between security and privacy or convenience.


  • Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.comtoPrivacy@lemmy.mlSwitched to GrapheneOS today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    If the security benefits of a pixel is less important then the fact Google made it then GOS is simply not meant for you.

    Its silly people complain about it being only compatible for pixels but never seem to blame other android brands for making significantly less secure phones. The responsibility should be put on phone makers to create secure phones that meet GOS requirements, not to expect GOS to make a less secure OS.

    The whole AOSP environment is very Google centric so its pretty weird to think because your not buying a pixel that you are somehow avoiding Google.


  • Honestly i found that whole excerpt to be pretty nonsensical.

    Don’t see how that relates to what i said and then you quoted but reworded (why?). Plus it all just circles back into “its bad cause the UX is slightly more inconvenient”.

    If the author had any substance to his argument it wouldn’t require laying out a ridiculous scenario just to get the reader to understand what in hell he is trying to say.

    He basically tldrs the whole article a few sentences later with " I want it to be easy to use." The author never seriously considers if that’s worth the cost.


  • Author seems to ignore that FOSS projects tend to be much smaller teams without budget to create the user experience that private VC funded projects can.

    Ths whole accountability argument seems to be pretty disingenuous, allowing anyone who wants to evaluate the source code is about as accountable as it gets.

    The not-so-subtle “you will be lazy about what your doing if someone is not paying you not to be” vibe throughout this article is off putting to say the least.

    I also find prioritizing user experience over the sharing of source code to be misguided. Allowing folks to gate keep knowledge and hide what they are doing is a big price just for a better user experience.

    The real issue with FOSS is the same as with P2P networks. Most people are leechers whose only contribution is lip service.










  • I am not going through this wall of BS point by point but here is a fine example of how I know you have no clue what your talking about…

    One place I strongly disagree with Graphene OS is the sandboxed Google services framework. They say having Google in a sandbox is more secure. It may be more secure, but it isn’t going to be as private as MicroG.

    MicorG has privileged access to you phone, it literally has no privacy benefits over even standard Google Play. You are just choosing to trust MicroG with that level of access instead of Google.

    Honestly just don’t use GOS if you don’t believe in its benefits or at least sack up and post this on their official forum.