4 ms·

Serious question; not trying to be snarky. Other than just personal privacy preferences what would are some practical reasons for why someone would use this pho

Serious question; not trying to be snarky. Other than just personal privacy preferences what would are some practical reasons for why someone would use this phone?

tristor 5y ago
Serious Answer: 1. I think that I have a right to participate in the digital commons without selling my soul to my choice of two possible corporate masters (Apple or Google). 1A. Corollary, the digital commons necessarily includes the ability to interact with the Internet in a mobile way. 2. There are mobile applications that have such a marked and clear positive impact on my life that doing without them is not merely an issue of convenience, but an issue of capability. 2A. These applications, through market forces, are only available on mobile devices running common mobile OSes. 3. My means of income requires me to fit as much as possible a societal mold that includes availability during reasonable hours via a mobile device. 3A. My employer is not one of the corporate masters, and they have no right to interject themselves in my relationship with my employer that I entered into voluntarily. When put together, these leave you only one viable option which is running secured hardware with a de-Googled version of Android. I don't see why /this/ device is any better than a Pixel + GrapheneOS done yourself, but the above explains why someone would want a Pixel + GrapheneOS. You are welcome to disagree with my reasoning, but it is sound.
- deltaonefour 5y ago
  I agree with this answer, but I'm not sure how to express the question. I mean something different when I say "practical." It's like a person who buys a gun because he wants to exercise his second amendment rights versus a hunter who buys a gun to hunt or a cop who buys a gun for law enforcement. I'm looking for more examples of the later type.
  - tristor 5y ago
    I think I understand your point, but I'm not sure how anyone could formulate an answer to satisfy it. The split is fundamentally philosophical, because there's no new capability gained by regaining your privacy vs simply accepting the status quo of letting Google interject itself into every aspect of your life. The absence of something cannot add any new capabilities. On the flip side, I think the mere existence of people who are successfully living a 'normal' life in the current era while regaining some reasonable measure of privacy is enough evidence to support the use case, beyond merely theoretical philosophical ideals.
    - deltaonefour 5y ago
      I was thinking there could be use cases like plausible deniability when doing illegal stuff or maybe these phones are useful for the same reason in espionage? Maybe these phones are required in the defense industry for secret or top secret clearance? Stuff like that was what I was guessing maybe these phones are useful for.
      - tristor 5y ago
        I'm sure those use cases do exist. I know that there are already special secured handsets made by defense contractors like that for use by top officials, generally in partnership with other companies. I believe Halliburton supplied specially modified Blackberries for years to the White House and Department of State, and the last I heard was that a different org was modifying Samsung handsets for similar purposes. Given that shift to Android, it would not surprise me if there was a market here for government officials working on confidential work to need secured handsets running Android where their government could lock the device to only a whitelisted set of apps. The US government for instance already has published STIGs for Android handsets. The reality is that for me, at least, government use cases don't interest me for a number of reasons, and I don't necessarily think they align with your clarification to the questions either. I think drawing the parallel to firearms is fuzzy, but if we go with that, there are obvious use cases a government has for firearms that don't support an argument in favor of civilian ownership, but there /are/ arguments that support civilian ownership. Perhaps nothing else makes me more anxious than that thought of a world where privacy and crypto are considered to be something only allowed for elites and government officials, where all of us normies have to be surveilled 24/7. This is already a reality in some parts of the world and fast becoming a reality in the West. Hence, I am not really concerned with how useful this may be to government, I am /only/ concerned with how useful this is to normal every-day people who just don't want to be spied on. Most of the modern surveillance isn't even done for a reason, it's just dragnet surveillance on everyone "because they can", which is the worst type.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
mobiletoss1337 5y ago
In terms of user experience, it's pretty obvious that GrapheneOS suffers by comparison. For example, the camera app isn't as amazing as it is on Pixel with full Google Android, and it probably never will be. You can install apps from the Google pay store with Aurora -- even things like Google maps and Gboard for swipe typing, but you will probably prefer them to be more secure and so you'll lock them down as much as possible, lessening their utility. So, in "practical", non-privacy/non-security terms, it's crazy to want something like this instead of the "real" Pixel 6 Pro experience (or Samsung S21 Ultra, or iPhone 13 Pro Max, etc), or perhaps until you read e.g. the shockingly bad Samsung privacy policy. However, there are some other benefits derived from the privacy aspects that aren't strictly privacy benefits themselves: * Hobby enjoyment * Trusting (to a degree) your device But, for me, I love my GrapheneOS phone and it's all of the above. I can live with the limitations, for the most part, and I've also purchased a wonderful Fujifilm camera when I really want to take amazing photos, which of course blows away any phone camera system anyway. The Pixel itself is still a really great smart phone experience, and way beyond my Pine phone (current generation) in terms of both security and usability, even without the few things that are taken out when you switch from Google to open source Android.
- xanaxagoras 5y ago
  > For example, the camera app isn't as amazing as it is on Pixel with full Google Android, and it probably never will be. I haven't used Graphene but I assume most users do what most Calyx users do, which is extract the gcam apk before flashing, install it, and completely block its internet access with the firewall. We can and do use the stock camera, and it's great.
- strcat 5y ago
  > In terms of user experience, it's pretty obvious that GrapheneOS suffers by comparison. For example, the camera app isn't as amazing as it is on Pixel with full Google Android, and it probably never will be. You can install apps from the Google pay store with Aurora -- even things like Google maps and Gboard for swipe typing, but you will probably prefer them to be more secure and so you'll lock them down as much as possible, lessening their utility. GrapheneOS recently added our own modern Camera app replacing the legacy AOSP Camera. You can also use the Google Camera app included in the stock OS on GrapheneOS if you want more features. It only depends on GSF which can be installed alongside it as another fully sandboxed app. They work the same way as any other apps. There's a guide on the camera at https://grapheneos.org/usage#camera https://grapheneos.org/usage#camera. GrapheneOS has the same camera quality and features as the stock OS. It's the apps which are different, and you can use the stock OS camera app. It's also possible to use Play services (GMS) and the Play Store as fully sandboxed apps due to the sandboxed Play services compatibility layer on GrapheneOS. You might be choosing to use it without that but it does have broad app compatibility for users who want it. You don't have to give up much to use GrapheneOS anymore. Not every Play services feature is available but the functionality that's available is steadily expanding as we make extensions to the compatibility layer. https://grapheneos.org/usage#sandboxed-play-services https://grapheneos.org/usage#sandboxed-play-services The compatibility layer enables using GSF, GMS and the Play Store as fully sandboxed apps with exactly the same restrictions and permission model as any other user installed app. That includes the improvements offered by GrapheneOS such as the Sensors toggle, Network toggle, stronger sandbox and other privacy/security improvements protecting the OS from apps.

Serious question; not trying to be snarky. Other than just personal privacy preferences what would are some practical reasons for why someone would use this phone?

tristor 5y ago

Serious Answer: 1. I think that I have a right to participate in the digital commons without selling my soul to my choice of two possible corporate masters (Apple or Google). 1A. Corollary, the digital commons necessarily includes the ability to interact with the Internet in a mobile way. 2. There are mobile applications that have such a marked and clear positive impact on my life that doing without them is not merely an issue of convenience, but an issue of capability. 2A. These applications, through market forces, are only available on mobile devices running common mobile OSes. 3. My means of income requires me to fit as much as possible a societal mold that includes availability during reasonable hours via a mobile device. 3A. My employer is not one of the corporate masters, and they have no right to interject themselves in my relationship with my employer that I entered into voluntarily. When put together, these leave you only one viable option which is running secured hardware with a de-Googled version of Android. I don't see why /this/ device is any better than a Pixel + GrapheneOS done yourself, but the above explains why someone would want a Pixel + GrapheneOS. You are welcome to disagree with my reasoning, but it is sound.

deltaonefour 5y ago
I agree with this answer, but I'm not sure how to express the question. I mean something different when I say "practical." It's like a person who buys a gun because he wants to exercise his second amendment rights versus a hunter who buys a gun to hunt or a cop who buys a gun for law enforcement. I'm looking for more examples of the later type.
- tristor 5y ago
  I think I understand your point, but I'm not sure how anyone could formulate an answer to satisfy it. The split is fundamentally philosophical, because there's no new capability gained by regaining your privacy vs simply accepting the status quo of letting Google interject itself into every aspect of your life. The absence of something cannot add any new capabilities. On the flip side, I think the mere existence of people who are successfully living a 'normal' life in the current era while regaining some reasonable measure of privacy is enough evidence to support the use case, beyond merely theoretical philosophical ideals.
  - deltaonefour 5y ago
    I was thinking there could be use cases like plausible deniability when doing illegal stuff or maybe these phones are useful for the same reason in espionage? Maybe these phones are required in the defense industry for secret or top secret clearance? Stuff like that was what I was guessing maybe these phones are useful for.
    - tristor 5y ago
      I'm sure those use cases do exist. I know that there are already special secured handsets made by defense contractors like that for use by top officials, generally in partnership with other companies. I believe Halliburton supplied specially modified Blackberries for years to the White House and Department of State, and the last I heard was that a different org was modifying Samsung handsets for similar purposes. Given that shift to Android, it would not surprise me if there was a market here for government officials working on confidential work to need secured handsets running Android where their government could lock the device to only a whitelisted set of apps. The US government for instance already has published STIGs for Android handsets. The reality is that for me, at least, government use cases don't interest me for a number of reasons, and I don't necessarily think they align with your clarification to the questions either. I think drawing the parallel to firearms is fuzzy, but if we go with that, there are obvious use cases a government has for firearms that don't support an argument in favor of civilian ownership, but there /are/ arguments that support civilian ownership. Perhaps nothing else makes me more anxious than that thought of a world where privacy and crypto are considered to be something only allowed for elites and government officials, where all of us normies have to be surveilled 24/7. This is already a reality in some parts of the world and fast becoming a reality in the West. Hence, I am not really concerned with how useful this may be to government, I am /only/ concerned with how useful this is to normal every-day people who just don't want to be spied on. Most of the modern surveillance isn't even done for a reason, it's just dragnet surveillance on everyone "because they can", which is the worst type.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

mobiletoss1337 5y ago

In terms of user experience, it's pretty obvious that GrapheneOS suffers by comparison. For example, the camera app isn't as amazing as it is on Pixel with full Google Android, and it probably never will be. You can install apps from the Google pay store with Aurora -- even things like Google maps and Gboard for swipe typing, but you will probably prefer them to be more secure and so you'll lock them down as much as possible, lessening their utility. So, in "practical", non-privacy/non-security terms, it's crazy to want something like this instead of the "real" Pixel 6 Pro experience (or Samsung S21 Ultra, or iPhone 13 Pro Max, etc), or perhaps until you read e.g. the shockingly bad Samsung privacy policy. However, there are some other benefits derived from the privacy aspects that aren't strictly privacy benefits themselves: * Hobby enjoyment * Trusting (to a degree) your device But, for me, I love my GrapheneOS phone and it's all of the above. I can live with the limitations, for the most part, and I've also purchased a wonderful Fujifilm camera when I really want to take amazing photos, which of course blows away any phone camera system anyway. The Pixel itself is still a really great smart phone experience, and way beyond my Pine phone (current generation) in terms of both security and usability, even without the few things that are taken out when you switch from Google to open source Android.

xanaxagoras 5y ago
> For example, the camera app isn't as amazing as it is on Pixel with full Google Android, and it probably never will be. I haven't used Graphene but I assume most users do what most Calyx users do, which is extract the gcam apk before flashing, install it, and completely block its internet access with the firewall. We can and do use the stock camera, and it's great.
strcat 5y ago
> In terms of user experience, it's pretty obvious that GrapheneOS suffers by comparison. For example, the camera app isn't as amazing as it is on Pixel with full Google Android, and it probably never will be. You can install apps from the Google pay store with Aurora -- even things like Google maps and Gboard for swipe typing, but you will probably prefer them to be more secure and so you'll lock them down as much as possible, lessening their utility. GrapheneOS recently added our own modern Camera app replacing the legacy AOSP Camera. You can also use the Google Camera app included in the stock OS on GrapheneOS if you want more features. It only depends on GSF which can be installed alongside it as another fully sandboxed app. They work the same way as any other apps. There's a guide on the camera at https://grapheneos.org/usage#camera https://grapheneos.org/usage#camera. GrapheneOS has the same camera quality and features as the stock OS. It's the apps which are different, and you can use the stock OS camera app. It's also possible to use Play services (GMS) and the Play Store as fully sandboxed apps due to the sandboxed Play services compatibility layer on GrapheneOS. You might be choosing to use it without that but it does have broad app compatibility for users who want it. You don't have to give up much to use GrapheneOS anymore. Not every Play services feature is available but the functionality that's available is steadily expanding as we make extensions to the compatibility layer. https://grapheneos.org/usage#sandboxed-play-services https://grapheneos.org/usage#sandboxed-play-services The compatibility layer enables using GSF, GMS and the Play Store as fully sandboxed apps with exactly the same restrictions and permission model as any other user installed app. That includes the improvements offered by GrapheneOS such as the Sensors toggle, Network toggle, stronger sandbox and other privacy/security improvements protecting the OS from apps.