Conversation

q66
@octaforge
Replying to
@DanielMicay
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
well, I have no strong feelings whatsoever about grapheneos and if I had an android phone capable of running it I wouldn't mind giving it a shot so please don't take it the wrong way, I won't go and derail grapheneos twitter threads either ;)
2
1
q66
@octaforge
Replying to
@octaforge
@DanielMicay
and 2 others
also: despite not agreeing that forking android and mitigating the bad things in it is not a good long term solution, don't take that as me rejecting your work in any way: it is still important since it enables people with existing hardware to get something better *right now*
2
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to
@octaforge
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
It's a far better platform for privacy and security than the desktop Linux software stack. The biggest issue for security in AOSP is the Linux kernel. AOSP vs. iOS is a mixed bag and I wouldn't describe what GrapheneOS does as mitigating things that are bad vs. other OSes.
2
2
q66
@octaforge
Replying to
@DanielMicay
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
I'm not talking about an individual's security/privacy, it's more like a power/influence problem, which I consider more important when it comes to the big picture (and I believe the two are inherently tied together)
2
q66
@octaforge
Replying to
@octaforge
@DanielMicay
and 2 others
as I said in another branch of the thread - a google derived/compatible codebase (in any way) results in proliferation of a non-free ecosystem where google has the final word - and this then results in things bad for the user - which is why I don't think it's ideal
1
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to
@octaforge
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
In the same way that LLVM is not an Apple project anymore, AOSP and Chromium don't need to remain primarily Google projects. There are a bunch of companies and projects using both of those. Don't have to leave Google in charge of making all the upstream decisions for them.
1
1
q66
@octaforge
Replying to
@DanielMicay
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
chromium is very much google controlled and will remain that way (contributing any patches that aren't commercially interesting to them is a major pain and often are met with rejection) I don't see AOSP being any different llvm was never really an apple project per se
2
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to
@octaforge
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
LLVM was as much of an Apple project as WebKit. Clang was entirely an Apple project from the start. Both of them transitioned to being controlled by a foundation not at all controlled by Apple. Various Google open source projects have gone through comparable transitions to that.
1
q66
@octaforge
Replying to
@DanielMicay
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
llvm wasn't even started at apple, and both llvm and webkit have been managed as actual open source projects with open contributions for as long as I can remember with chromium and android this has *never* been the case
1
Daniel Micay
@DanielMicay
Replying to
@octaforge
@hybr1z
and
@mntmn
AOSP and Chromium are actual open source projects with actual open source contributions. Chromium is almost entirely developed in the open other than security fixes. AOSP is partly developed in the open and partly behind closed doors with code dumps (merges into AOSP) for those.
2
Show replies