5 ms·

>But I’m not paranoid. I don’t think Google is out to get me, or is in league with people who are. they are a data selling company. anybody now or in the futur

>But I’m not paranoid. I don’t think Google is out to get me, or is in league with people who are. they are a data selling company. anybody now or in the future who deems that data valuable can acquire it. worrying about such data falling into the wrong hands sooner or later is not paranoid but knowing history and learning from it. i agree that if you are serious about de-Googling that GrapehenOS is a much better fit not to mention superior security, however that is only the first step.

fsflover 2y ago
> i agree that if you are serious about de-Googling that GrapehenOS is a much better fit A GNU/Linux smartphone is an even better fit for this. GrapheneOS uses Google hardware and AOSP written by Google.
- akimbostrawman 2y ago
  i like GNU/Linux but on smartphones they are inferior to GraphenOS security which is a integral part to privacy not to mention lacking app support.
  - fsflover 2y ago
    Security depends on the threat model. I do not trust Google hardware. Also Librem 5 has a smart card and hardware kill switches.
- BadHumans 2y ago
  Too bad Linux smartphones fail at the smartphone part of it.
  - fsflover 2y ago
    They don't. I use one as a daily driver.
    - reginald78 2y ago
      Which one? I'm a light phone user but the main reason I carry it is texting my family and (to a surprisingly lesser extent) making and receiving phone calls.
      - fsflover 2y ago
        Librem 5. See my other posts in this topic.
- RDaneel0livaw 2y ago
  I would absolutely LOVE to have a linux smartphone, but as far as I'm aware, there really isn't one that can be used as a competent daily driver. Has that changed recently? For me, a competent daily driver is a device that can last all day on a single charge, do gps mapping, reliably make and receive calls/texts, and install a handful of apps such as Signal and a banking app.
  - fsflover 2y ago
    https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-5-phone-review/21085 https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-5-phone-review/21085 https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-current-state-of-the-librem-5-is-actually-pretty-good/20541 https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-current-state-of-the-librem-5-i... https://forums.puri.sm/t/nine-months-librem-5-as-my-only-phone-my-review-and-workflow/23268 https://forums.puri.sm/t/nine-months-librem-5-as-my-only-pho... > such as Signal I saw people using Signal on the forums, but Signal intentionally doesn't directly support ARM desktop GNU/Linux, so it's not straightforward AFAIK. > and a banking app This depends on the bank. Some banks allow to use their apps with Waydroid.
    - pengaru 2y ago
      I love my L5, but would never suggest or even imply to anyone that it's usable as a daily driven phone. The battery life is terrible and the software still buggy as hell. It's a great host for Linux phone development though. I haven't had any major problems with the hardware being unstable or anything along those lines. But once you start expecting the whole package to function more as a primary phone than a portable devkit you're using to further the state of Linux phones, it gets ugly pretty quick IME.
      - fsflover 2y ago
        It all depends on your specific usage patterns. I can replace the battery during the day if I need (I don't do it every day). I find software sometimes buggy but usable as a daily driver.
    - LorenDB 2y ago
- foresto 2y ago
  > A GNU/Linux smartphone is an even better fit for this. Why GNU? Their runtime stack isn't exactly known as the best fit for constrained devices like a smartphone.
  - fsflover 2y ago
    It seems you never tried Phosh or SXMo.
  - amszmidt 2y ago
    In what way do you consider smartphones constrained? They have more memory and processing power than a normal computer from 20 years back, even 10 years back.
    - foresto 2y ago
      Roughly: They're not PCs. For one thing, they all have limited battery life. For another, not everyone can afford brand new flagship phones, so folks who keep cheaper phones for long enough can easily find CPU and RAM to be stretched as new app versions start to demand more of the hardware. Conserving resources is beneficial in general, and especially so on mobile devices. Every little bit helps. Why I consider smartphones constrained is unimportant here, though. The question isn't whether GNU libs/utils can run on a smartphone. The question is why the person above said GNU specifically. I'm trying to suss out whether they are aware of some special case that would make GNU better than e.g. musl on a phone, or were just repeating a bit of that "GNU/Linux" rant that was (incorrectly, I think) attributed to Stallman. If it's the former, it seems like information worth sharing.
      - fsflover 2y ago
        Thanks for the detailed explanations. I wrote GNU because I meant it. I'm talking about running an original desktop OS on phones, which unifies the software stack and allows to have a full desktop in a pocket. It's much more convenient to have the same software running everywhere. You can connect a screen/keyboard and get a full desktop [0]. Firefox on my phone is a desktop one without a rewritten codebase. You can use all GNU utilities in a terminal on the go. If you are talking about saving resources, then why do you think we need several devices when we can have just one? All existing desktop software doesn't have to be rewritten from scratch but should "only" be made fit for both large and small screens. Doesn't it save resources? Concerning the battery life, we need to improve it for laptops, too, anyway. Also, currently, it already allows to have a one day of use, which is mostly sufficient. [0] https://puri.sm/posts/my-first-year-of-librem-5-convergence/ https://puri.sm/posts/my-first-year-of-librem-5-convergence/
mid-kid 2y ago
I think privacy and security are orthogonal, and I'm not convinced that GrapheneOS does a lot more than LineageOS isn't already doing for me in the privacy aspect - some of graphene's touted features are geared towards being able to use google's services in a secure and moderately private manner, but I'd much rather not use them at all. Meanwhile, its security features complicate life a lot with no tangible benefit to me, as I don't have a threat model that makes it interesting. I find my own freedom to modify my device as easily and freely as possible (e.g. by properly rooting it) much more important than locking myself down in the name of security.
- akimbostrawman 2y ago
  >I'm not convinced that GrapheneOS does a lot more than LineageOS isn't already doing for me in the privacy aspect GrapheneOS has has many more feature that AOSP/LineageOS lack (https://grapheneos.org/features https://grapheneos.org/features) and also 0 google connections unlike LineageOS (https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections) >some of graphene's touted features are geared towards being able to use google's services and they are 100% optional and opt-in by default
  - kenmacd 2y ago
    I have to agree with mid-kid here. GrapheneOS is great for security, but some of that ends up directly in conflict with privacy. For example years ago I opened an issue around runtime-patching applications (https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/284 https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/284) and was told it didn't make sense in the OS. Putting aside the validity of arguments on either side of that issue, runtime patching allows me to very quickly excise large swaths of anti-privacy code across every app on my phone. If I was to switch to GrapheneOS I'd have to accept that I'd be giving up a fair amount of privacy for the added security.
    - akimbostrawman 2y ago
      the "private" way to remove ads and spyware from apps is not using them or revoking android.permission.INTERNET permission which GrapheneOS offers. not playing cat and mouse with the illusion of privacy.
sowbug 2y ago
Google sells attention, not data. If this statement is incorrect, please give me a pointer where I can buy user data from Google, and I'll correct my statement.
- shortsunblack 2y ago
  Google gladly will broadcast you OpenRTB data (which includes meter accuracy location data) with shitty enterprise XML APIs if you are in the lists.
  - ajross 2y ago
    Do you have a cite for that? That would be very surprising if so, the intent behind the RTB stuff is that it's anonymized. I really don't think this is correct.
- exe34 2y ago
  just because they're not selling it now doesn't mean that they won't. there's nothing stopping them. money can make them.
- wcfields 2y ago
  You can buy anonymized user data of searches by zip codes. You can get it fairly targeted if you clean room it against other data sets (set top boxes for instance). I used to work for a media agency’s analytics dept and we got feeds from G, F, and others we dumped into a giant DB for modeling and analysis of our clients ad reach effectiveness.
  - sowbug 2y ago
    Thanks. That's the closest to an on-point response that I've ever gotten to this question.
throwaway42761 2y ago
> i agree that if you are serious about de-Googling that GrapehenOS is a much better fit Why would anyone who's serious about de-Googling opt for a ROM that only runs on Google phones?
- akimbostrawman 2y ago
  because it has superior hardware https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices and with GrapehenOS there are 0 google connections https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]

fsflover 2y ago

> i agree that if you are serious about de-Googling that GrapehenOS is a much better fit A GNU/Linux smartphone is an even better fit for this. GrapheneOS uses Google hardware and AOSP written by Google.

akimbostrawman 2y ago
i like GNU/Linux but on smartphones they are inferior to GraphenOS security which is a integral part to privacy not to mention lacking app support.
- fsflover 2y ago
  Security depends on the threat model. I do not trust Google hardware. Also Librem 5 has a smart card and hardware kill switches.
BadHumans 2y ago
Too bad Linux smartphones fail at the smartphone part of it.
- fsflover 2y ago
  They don't. I use one as a daily driver.
  - reginald78 2y ago
    Which one? I'm a light phone user but the main reason I carry it is texting my family and (to a surprisingly lesser extent) making and receiving phone calls.
    - fsflover 2y ago
      Librem 5. See my other posts in this topic.
RDaneel0livaw 2y ago
I would absolutely LOVE to have a linux smartphone, but as far as I'm aware, there really isn't one that can be used as a competent daily driver. Has that changed recently? For me, a competent daily driver is a device that can last all day on a single charge, do gps mapping, reliably make and receive calls/texts, and install a handful of apps such as Signal and a banking app.
- fsflover 2y ago
  https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-5-phone-review/21085 https://forums.puri.sm/t/librem-5-phone-review/21085 https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-current-state-of-the-librem-5-is-actually-pretty-good/20541 https://forums.puri.sm/t/the-current-state-of-the-librem-5-i... https://forums.puri.sm/t/nine-months-librem-5-as-my-only-phone-my-review-and-workflow/23268 https://forums.puri.sm/t/nine-months-librem-5-as-my-only-pho... > such as Signal I saw people using Signal on the forums, but Signal intentionally doesn't directly support ARM desktop GNU/Linux, so it's not straightforward AFAIK. > and a banking app This depends on the bank. Some banks allow to use their apps with Waydroid.
  - pengaru 2y ago
    I love my L5, but would never suggest or even imply to anyone that it's usable as a daily driven phone. The battery life is terrible and the software still buggy as hell. It's a great host for Linux phone development though. I haven't had any major problems with the hardware being unstable or anything along those lines. But once you start expecting the whole package to function more as a primary phone than a portable devkit you're using to further the state of Linux phones, it gets ugly pretty quick IME.
    - fsflover 2y ago
      It all depends on your specific usage patterns. I can replace the battery during the day if I need (I don't do it every day). I find software sometimes buggy but usable as a daily driver.
  - LorenDB 2y ago
foresto 2y ago
> A GNU/Linux smartphone is an even better fit for this. Why GNU? Their runtime stack isn't exactly known as the best fit for constrained devices like a smartphone.
- fsflover 2y ago
  It seems you never tried Phosh or SXMo.
- amszmidt 2y ago
  In what way do you consider smartphones constrained? They have more memory and processing power than a normal computer from 20 years back, even 10 years back.
  - foresto 2y ago
    Roughly: They're not PCs. For one thing, they all have limited battery life. For another, not everyone can afford brand new flagship phones, so folks who keep cheaper phones for long enough can easily find CPU and RAM to be stretched as new app versions start to demand more of the hardware. Conserving resources is beneficial in general, and especially so on mobile devices. Every little bit helps. Why I consider smartphones constrained is unimportant here, though. The question isn't whether GNU libs/utils can run on a smartphone. The question is why the person above said GNU specifically. I'm trying to suss out whether they are aware of some special case that would make GNU better than e.g. musl on a phone, or were just repeating a bit of that "GNU/Linux" rant that was (incorrectly, I think) attributed to Stallman. If it's the former, it seems like information worth sharing.
    - fsflover 2y ago
      Thanks for the detailed explanations. I wrote GNU because I meant it. I'm talking about running an original desktop OS on phones, which unifies the software stack and allows to have a full desktop in a pocket. It's much more convenient to have the same software running everywhere. You can connect a screen/keyboard and get a full desktop [0]. Firefox on my phone is a desktop one without a rewritten codebase. You can use all GNU utilities in a terminal on the go. If you are talking about saving resources, then why do you think we need several devices when we can have just one? All existing desktop software doesn't have to be rewritten from scratch but should "only" be made fit for both large and small screens. Doesn't it save resources? Concerning the battery life, we need to improve it for laptops, too, anyway. Also, currently, it already allows to have a one day of use, which is mostly sufficient. [0] https://puri.sm/posts/my-first-year-of-librem-5-convergence/ https://puri.sm/posts/my-first-year-of-librem-5-convergence/

mid-kid 2y ago

I think privacy and security are orthogonal, and I'm not convinced that GrapheneOS does a lot more than LineageOS isn't already doing for me in the privacy aspect - some of graphene's touted features are geared towards being able to use google's services in a secure and moderately private manner, but I'd much rather not use them at all. Meanwhile, its security features complicate life a lot with no tangible benefit to me, as I don't have a threat model that makes it interesting. I find my own freedom to modify my device as easily and freely as possible (e.g. by properly rooting it) much more important than locking myself down in the name of security.

akimbostrawman 2y ago
>I'm not convinced that GrapheneOS does a lot more than LineageOS isn't already doing for me in the privacy aspect GrapheneOS has has many more feature that AOSP/LineageOS lack (https://grapheneos.org/features https://grapheneos.org/features) and also 0 google connections unlike LineageOS (https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections) >some of graphene's touted features are geared towards being able to use google's services and they are 100% optional and opt-in by default
- kenmacd 2y ago
  I have to agree with mid-kid here. GrapheneOS is great for security, but some of that ends up directly in conflict with privacy. For example years ago I opened an issue around runtime-patching applications (https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/284 https://github.com/GrapheneOS/os-issue-tracker/issues/284) and was told it didn't make sense in the OS. Putting aside the validity of arguments on either side of that issue, runtime patching allows me to very quickly excise large swaths of anti-privacy code across every app on my phone. If I was to switch to GrapheneOS I'd have to accept that I'd be giving up a fair amount of privacy for the added security.
  - akimbostrawman 2y ago
    the "private" way to remove ads and spyware from apps is not using them or revoking android.permission.INTERNET permission which GrapheneOS offers. not playing cat and mouse with the illusion of privacy.

sowbug 2y ago

Google sells attention, not data. If this statement is incorrect, please give me a pointer where I can buy user data from Google, and I'll correct my statement.

shortsunblack 2y ago
Google gladly will broadcast you OpenRTB data (which includes meter accuracy location data) with shitty enterprise XML APIs if you are in the lists.
- ajross 2y ago
  Do you have a cite for that? That would be very surprising if so, the intent behind the RTB stuff is that it's anonymized. I really don't think this is correct.
exe34 2y ago
just because they're not selling it now doesn't mean that they won't. there's nothing stopping them. money can make them.
wcfields 2y ago
You can buy anonymized user data of searches by zip codes. You can get it fairly targeted if you clean room it against other data sets (set top boxes for instance). I used to work for a media agency’s analytics dept and we got feeds from G, F, and others we dumped into a giant DB for modeling and analysis of our clients ad reach effectiveness.
- sowbug 2y ago
  Thanks. That's the closest to an on-point response that I've ever gotten to this question.

throwaway42761 2y ago

> i agree that if you are serious about de-Googling that GrapehenOS is a much better fit Why would anyone who's serious about de-Googling opt for a ROM that only runs on Google phones?

akimbostrawman 2y ago
because it has superior hardware https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices and with GrapehenOS there are 0 google connections https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]