Mastodawn

@skywalker2k17

> which has corrected its mistakes after Graphene pointed it out

It hasn't been anywhere close to fully corrected. In fact, they added a false narrative from Murena to the article misrepresenting GrapheneOS as not being a privacy project or /e/ somehow being more focused on privacy. They left around implying that devices can't be purchased with GrapheneOS which is inaccurate too.

@GrapheneOS But they didn't say that Graphene isn't a privacy project and they also corrected to say /e/ is for people who wants to avoid sending their data to Google (which is kinda true but also not). They didn't correct the last part though, they should have added that you can purchase Nitrophones and I'd say the editorial note they added at the end helps, that /e/ can have more device vulnerabilities that can leak users data and obviously they didn't want to openly pick either side and just left it to the community to decide.

They didn't go as deep as Kuketz's article which was why I mentioned that people should read through it as well if they are considering /e/OS.

@skywalker2k17 They misrepresent GrapheneOS as a security project which is a false narrative from Murena and other groups pretending it isn't a privacy project. They're misrepresenting it as not being for people focused on privacy when it provides far better privacy. Unlike /e/, GrapheneOS avoids connecting to any Google servers itself and avoids including a bunch of privileged Google app/service integration as /e/ does. Their comparison is thoroughly inaccurate and based on false narratives.

@GrapheneOS That's a hardline stance but yes, I agree with what you said as /e/ isn't truly open regarding their unnecessary connections to Google servers, enabling microG by default, unique device identifier ID and the constant pings to Murena's servers despite it set to once daily. Which was why I also mentioned in the post to read the article which is eye-opening regarding /e/. As for why I am not saying /e/ or other ROMs are bad outright is because I am not as well versed as either you or any of other tech companies and this isn't my area of expertise and I believe it best left to people involved in the process and the person choosing their OS after they properly research.

@skywalker2k17 People can use LineageOS rather than a problematic fork of it. /e/ isn't what it claims to be and isn't fit for purpose. It exists for the founders and other shareholders to enrich themselves by selling phony privacy products. If /e/ comes up simply tell people to use LineageOS instead to avoid the major downgrade in both privacy and security from /e/. LineageOS is not a privacy or security hardened OS and does lag behind on updates but it's definitely far better than /e/.

@GrapheneOS I'll definitely be doing that, degoogled Lineage is better than any implementations of /e/. Should I say the same when talking about IodeOS? As information on Iode isn't as widely available as /e/ and I didn't look into it and am taking your word for it as the expert on this matter.

@skywalker2k17 iodéOS is a worse choice than LineageOS too. Both are problem forks of LineageOS engaging in inaccurate marketing and attacks on the GrapheneOS project. People should just use LineageOS instead of supporting either of these for-profit companies prioritizing money far above wanting to make things better. iodé is closely partnered with Robert Braxman and has a business deal with him. Braxman is a charlatan who has spent years making inaccurate attacks on Signal, GrapheneOS, etc.

@GrapheneOS Thank you for the information, I have no clue who Robert Braxman is but a quick search showed he's very similar to how Murena and Gael operate (except Brax has a bigger YT presence) which is how he probably sells his products. I'll take note to remember and mention Lineage is a better alternative than either /e/ or Iode (and try to point people towards your article on /e/) but I will obviously be leaving the decision to the person making it (as intended).

@GrapheneOS And I edited my toot to say ifixit corrected "some of their mistakes" after Graphene pointed it out and I forgot to say this earlier, I did find it amusing how they said Graphene is focused around security and didn't mention privacy but even if we were to point it out they will just say what I said earlier "we didn't say it's not private" and didn't pay it much attention cuz they did go into the vulnerabilities of using /e/ which at least shows their intention to not be openly biased against Graphene if contested.