palata

4 ms·

31.
by palata 20d ago
> And that's actually a perfectly valid argument; handing root access to apps does break their security model, but if the user doesn't have root then I'd contest the idea that the user is in control. First, "protectin
32.
by palata 20d ago
Well then you install apps .
33.
by palata 20d ago
> By being this exclusive, it counts as a complete endorsement I disagree. The only way they can prove that they can build a good system is to prove it on good hardware, and the Pixels are the only ones that meet the criteria. If Graphen
34.
by palata 21d ago
I think it would just be a lot of work. And if you went down that road, you would be against other teams with bigger marketing and a bigger community. As in: people who do care enough to understand the technical arguments tend to go for Gra
35.
by palata 21d ago
> How about microG not contacting Google servers at all? I already addressed that in my comment, right after the line you quoted. > Letting Google handle push notifications is different from using them as your location provider, and b
36.
by palata 21d ago
I have seen inflammatory comments coming from all communities, I wouldn't say it's only GrapheneOS. Though I haven't seen any of those in a while... as if they all got a lot more professional in their communications suddenly?
37.
by palata 21d ago
Isn't the Pinephone getting super old now? And it was already very slow when it was released...
38.
by palata 21d ago
> it's pretty clear to me you're simply driven by emotions and tribalism, that the facts don't matter. Hmm I think this is a little unfair. GrapheneOS has technical reasons to support only Pixels, that's true. But tho
39.
by palata 21d ago
A problem I see is that GrapheneOS has a history of being extremely blunt about the shortcomings of alternatives, and of course alternatives (and users of alternatives) don't like getting that feeling that maybe they have been compromi
40.
by palata 21d ago
> It's not like any other device meets their ridiculous standards either I don't think it's ridiculous to want the ability to relock the bootloader, for instance? Do you realise that if you cannot do that, you just break t
41.
by palata 21d ago
> they also compare the security to the "Android Open Source Project" as if it's a real thing It is very much a real thing. You can build AOSP from sources and install it on a phone. Many Android devices run that (e.g. dro
42.
by palata 21d ago
> vs paranoia I really would like to mention that many times, using /e/OS or LineageOS (or the likes) means that you get worse security than Stock Android. It would be fine to run /e/OS or LineageOS on a Pixel, assumi
43.
by palata 21d ago
> and after the bullshit of the android upgrade Fair enough, but note that it does not concern GrapheneOS. Hopefully soon available on Motorola phones :-). That would be my next phone (assuming it's not too expensive of course).
44.
by palata 21d ago
I have been wondering and I first got a Fairphone 3+ because I thought, among others, it was "greener". Then I realised that: - Fairphone 3 was already "slow" when it was released in 2019 - Fairphone 3+ was pretty much e
45.
by palata 21d ago
> However, GOS's threat model very specifically treats the user as a thing to defend against Can you elaborate? GOS mostly honours the Android security model, which many alternatives don't do (many times they don't have a
46.
by palata 21d ago
> For the "freedom nerds", FP is one of the only (if not the only?) vendor to have official support for microG-based operating systems, seamless OTA updates and everything included. I am not sure what you are trying to say here
47.
by palata 21d ago
So I have been on /e/OS on a Fairphone 3+ for 4.5 years. I was really into /e/OS when I got my Fairphone. When it stopped being usable (not because the hardware was not working anymore, just that the apps I want on my ph
48.
by palata 22d ago
On the other hand, my experience with /e/OS on a Fairphone was that it was 4 years behind in updates as compared to Stock Android on that Fairphone. I don't think that expecting security updates it being an extremist, or is i
49.
by palata 22d ago
Does it automatically generate a TLS certificate? I didn't find documentation about that, just that you can setup your own domain. Seems really cool!
50.
by palata 22d ago
> I don't know why you just wrote 7 paragraphs arguing against something I didn't say I argue against something you keep repeating: > GrapheneOS is free, but it has implemented features that are designed to make it harder to
51.
by palata 22d ago
> If it was subpar, then the salary would not have been accepted. Turns out it was. Young graduate excited with the mission, and all that bullshit.
52.
by palata 22d ago
> You took a gamble on a lower salary with the expectation that it would be compensated by your company stock going up in value. I did not. I joined a startup as a young graduate without thinking about what stocks meant at all. > Whic
53.
by palata 22d ago
Again you don't understand Stallman's quote. Let me try: > If the program is delivered in a product designed to run someone else's modified versions but refuse to run yours—a practice known as “tivoization” or “lockdown,”
54.
by palata 22d ago
If you want to go with that tone... I wonder if you did not understand my English or if you lack basic logic? I did not say that I felt scam because of my low salary. I said that I felt scam because the founders got rich and what I got didn
55.
by palata 23d ago
You misunderstand what Stallman says. The quote agrees with my definition. You can do all that with GrapheneOS today. What you are asking for is root access on the GrapheneOS official builds. Where does Stallman say you should get it?
56.
by palata 23d ago
It is a scam to me because they imply "if the founders get rich, we all get rich" because "we're on the same boat". And it's not the same boat at all: the founders may get rich, the employees most likely not.
57.
by palata 23d ago
> At this day and age, if you don't understand dilution before you join, it's entirely on you. I don't know what to tell you. Young graduates get an offer to work at a startup, nobody tells them how it works. They are just
58.
by palata 23d ago
> Founders get 25-75% where employees get 0.01-1%, maybe a bit more if they're lucky. So that's a scam by the founders to the employees, in my book. It's fine, it's just that I am not sure young professionals joining
59.
by palata 23d ago
> If you had gotten rich from the stocks you wouldn't have complained here. Duh. > That you wanted to gamble on that What makes you think I gambled at all?
60.
by palata 23d ago
> OSS community has shown itself capable of tackling some of the hairiest technical challenges (Linux) Has it though, say in the last decade? My first intuition would be that Linux was in a very different situation when it started. And i

More ›