Like it or not, every single solution developed by Graphene has a level of polish seen very rarely in FLOSS projects, they have every right to dispute comparisons that are unfair if the services they are compared to cheat.
While PG was busy recommending skiff and cozying up to any big projects that graced the forum (since it validated their personal project.), GOS was busy implementing real stuff used by journalists and dissidents 
Oh man, I started writing a serious reply because I thought you were a serious person, but then you showed us why you used a disposable account. Oh well!
Most of us like GrapheneOS.
Please donât imply that anyone who disagrees with GOSâs misleading characterization must only be disagreeing because they dislike GOS.
doesnât make it invalid.
Nobodyâs argument rested on dislike for GOS.
Haha yeah, I am a total clown. Used disposable because I am very aware of the founding myth of this forum lol and all the conflicts of interests PG team members donât disclose to the newcomers to the forum.
Still not silly enough to believe the newest blog post was written by someone getting paid for researching and analyzing Proton Wallet without actually going into the specific members behind that project within the Proton team. Nice grift with donations
At least we can agree on one thing.
Sometimes I really feel not comfortable using GrapheneOS and have the urge to just go back to Stock⌠No sense of critics is allowed by its community.
Anyways!
I think it is fair to say that uBlock Origin and AdGuard are cheating tests if they are indeed blocking requests on the domains of test suites.
I just think it is unfortunate that someone decided to frame this situation as bad behavior on their part, in order to advertise the new ad blocking capabilities in their own web browser.
The real takeaway is very simple, and doesnât require all the drama that has been injected into the conversation: these in-browser testing suites are a poor way to validate the effectiveness of these content blockers. It is very similar to the gross overuse of âbrowser fingerprint testâ websites that unnecessarily scare people into thinking the privacy tools they use are inadequate.
TL;DR just donât use d3wardâs site or ones like it and move on with your lives lol
Nobody framed it as âbad behavior.â It was just framed as cheating because itâs indeed cheating.
As for advertising, it wouldnât make sense at all. GOS couldnât care less about ad blocking, security and privacy are their priorities, their adblocker doesnât even block YouTube ads.
GOS couldnât care less about ad blocking, security and privacy are their priorities
You keep repeating this. Do you know how much malicious code can be injected through Ads?
Why should I care if that malicious code runs on the site or through ads? The browser should protect me regardless.
They couldnât care less about adblocking, and they make long threads of accusation to other blocker projects to satisfy their drama need. They actually cared less about adblocking when they didnât implement their own blocker and their users didnât complain about that site.
They are just framed as advertising because they are indeed advertising
Vanadium comes with a default enabled ad blocking implementation. It currently uses Chromiumâs standard filter engine without cosmetic filtering or the advanced uBlock Origin syntax so it doesnât quite block as much as uBlock Origin or Brave, but itâs more efficient and simpler.
Unfortunately, every time GrapheneOS is so much as merely mentioned in a conversation, the entire thing devolves into petty nonsense about them. Locking because it seems the actual conversation about adblock test sites concluded long ago, and weâre just stuck on GrapheneOS drama again.