fsflover

11 ms·

301.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Perhaps you could mention that, alternatively, one can rely on TPM with Heads and a hardware key for verified boot. In this case, no proprietary software is involved.
302.
by fsflover 4mo ago
This comes down to doubts and a wish to get precise information with links/lists of drivers/firmware. Requests come not just from my side either, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48585732 When I do recommend G
303.
by fsflover 4mo ago
> You can't call comprehensive replies "disingenuous walls of text" and then later complain about a lack of thoroughness when people stop finding it worth the time. It doesn't matter how bad a comment looks in your op
304.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Your accusations and personal attacks already go beyond any limits here. Please stop, as this is explicitly against the HN Guidelines. Especially, without clear links/evidence, as here. Anyone who trips over the thread should know this
305.
by fsflover 4mo ago
My point was about the word "awful", or, as many GrapheneOS supporters say here, "atrocious" security. This is definitely an overstatement. Otherwise, you're not wrong.
306.
by fsflover 4mo ago
So this comment of yours just states that I'm wrong and the parent is right. I see how you advanced the discussion here. > He didn't conflate them, he stated something very similar to your formulation above. My formulation is n
307.
by fsflover 4mo ago
You completely missed the context here. my comment was not about skipping the security features of GrapheneOS. The original parent comment was > No, them supporting e/OS corroborates the claim that their goal is not privacy or secur
308.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Macs are on their way to enshittification, too: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46322556 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43243075 Also, see this: https://news.ycombinator.com/i
309.
by fsflover 4mo ago
This is not the argument at all. It's just easier to discover malware in closed software.
310.
by fsflover 4mo ago
> Maintaining one's data as private requires that it is protected as a baseline. So you're conflating privacy with security, as I expected. These are separate matters, although I agree that privacy can't exist without secu
311.
by fsflover 4mo ago
They do not decide on the future directions of the development. It's a distributed process with many actors.
312.
by fsflover 4mo ago
What do you mean when you say "not private"? Are you accusing the company of sending private data to their servers, as Google and Apple do? Freedom of computing on Librem 5 doesn't end with the root account. It also allows to
313.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Is there a list of the drivers and closed libraries somewhere?
314.
by fsflover 4mo ago
What do they need to support to convince you? Providing all hardware features required by GrapheneOS is not feasible for a small company.
315.
by fsflover 4mo ago
> If 97% of your users are on mainstream OSes, and the rest also account for disproportionately high numbers of bug reports, why should they bother supporting alternatives? Because of those bug reports, very few may be specific to the
316.
by fsflover 4mo ago
By your reasoning, 99.9% of people use awfully insecure OSes on desktop and servers. And yet, the world hasn't collapsed. My bank account is not hacked regularly, too (actually, not at all).
317.
by fsflover 4mo ago
> Let's say, if I was a bank, I can understand why I would want to block such devices. So as a bank, you would be forcing your customers into the duopoly of the American megacorps. Thankfully, there are banks that do not do this.
318.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Perhaps you may be interested in GNU/Linux phones, which do not rely on Google in any way.
319.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Are you saying that GraphebneOS running on Google Pixels has no proprietary blobs apart from the firmware?
320.
by fsflover 4mo ago
If you value freedom to do what you want on your devices, then you may want to consider Librem 5 instead. It runs a desktop Debian derivative with full root access.
321.
by fsflover 4mo ago
In the absolute numbers, the parent is probably wrong. In percentage they're right.
322.
by fsflover 4mo ago
One way to decide is whether the company has a dedicated Wikipedia page with criticism, or, for the next level, a section.
323.
by fsflover 4mo ago
> No one makes a website for their hobby or game/book/movie they're a fan of This is just not true. We even have a dedicated web search for that: https:// wiby.me
324.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Too late to edit, I would't put my money on the reliability of these leaks for security-relevant decisions.
325.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Don't we have now much less wars than before, in general?
326.
by fsflover 4mo ago
The free intelligence may help to steer the society and politicians to one or the other side. The only question is who decides which.
327.
by fsflover 4mo ago
I would put my money on that these leaks have full source code. Also, currently, Windows even AFAIK sends keystrokes to the US, where NSA has full access to any company whenever they need by the law, with no oversight. No backdoors are requ
328.
by fsflover 4mo ago
The internet is decentralized and is not itself enshittified. For instance, our discussion on HN and many good websites, e.g., https://wiby.me .
329.
by fsflover 4mo ago
Enshittification can only happen in case of the centralized architecture like one in Twitter, Facebook and co. It's not happening in Mastodon or Matrix - and this is where the nerds are.
330.
by fsflover 4mo ago
> Especially ME, which has been thoroughly reverse-engineered by the security community by this point. Links? Activists say the opposite, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine#Assert...

More ›