Read the whole thread

However, we don’t have a “hardened security” approach, we aren’t developing a phone for pedo(censored) so they can evade justice.

  • Fedpie@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    8 days ago

    I think it’s fair they support way more phones than GrapheneOS, even if the security is way worse. But it’s a whole other thing to call people who want secure phones pedophiles.

    • weaselsrippedmyflesh@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Agree with your outlook, but I think it’s not too farfetched to give the benefit of the doubt to the speaker here and establish that pedophiles were used as an example (of people whose survival depends on their data not being breached), rather than a direct comparison. And he goes on to name being an executive to the secret services as another example (again, of people to whom hardened security of data is an imperative), but we’re not saying he thinks secure phones are just for people in secret services, are we?

      He’s just saying, albeit rather clumsily, that their goal is simply not that level of hardened security, but rather privacy from data miners.

      • azuth@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        You keep access to non-verified apps no matter what Google wants since it uses microG.

        It’s openness vs security.