4 ms·
>At that point you may as well implicate Apple, along with the rest of FAANG for being members of PRISM. Of course, as they should be. lets not go so far ahea
by Xelbair 2y ago
>At that point you may as well implicate Apple, along with the rest of FAANG for being members of PRISM.
Of course, as they should be.
lets not go so far ahead to call Android an "open" product, as flashing a custom rom is severely limited(both flashing, and your capabilities afterwards - for example you might run into issues with banking apps) - but at least you can read the source(without any guarantees that rom contents match it)
- talldayo 2y ago> lets not go so far ahead to call Android an "open" product Why not? When you use Android without Google services it makes perfect sense that some features break. The Play Store services won't work, which is bad but not critical for a smartphone. Pretty much every local feature Android has isn't broken by using a third-party ROM without Google services. I think it's perfectly fair to call Android an Open product, no less than Ubuntu is an Open product despite selling services to their users. > but at least you can read the source(without any guarantees that rom contents match it) There are multiple guarantees. You can build the ROM locally and flash it yourself if you're paranoid, the only parts you can't fully inspect is the firmware (which goes for most modern devices anyways). You can also match the official checksum provided by the ROM developer to verify that you're not being MITMed, decompress the ISO archive to inspect it before flashing, or use your Superuser privileges to inspect the root directory after installation. Android is uniquely open, and I don't think the existence of consequences for gutting Google services changes anything (for me, at least).