Or there could be big gaps between the doors so even when it’s closed and locked, they can see inside the stall 
1 Like
I distrust BigTech, but Graphene devs say: “Trust BigTech! Trust Google and Apple! They are the best!”
This is why I don’t trust GrapheneOS.
Of course you can trust Google and Apple. Their security is top notch.
The privacy? Not so much. At the end of the day, I trust open source over “just trust me bro” which is what Google and Apple offer by default.
If you don’t trust GrapheneOS, then what do you trust? Nothing?
1 Like
Fyi, there’s a smartphone maker named Nothing. 
This thread has been…… entertaining.
1 Like
Indeed, I trust nothing. All privacy “solutions” on the market boil down to blind belief. Although I am a Signal user, because I HOPE it is better than Whatsapp. I do it, because it costs no money to switch from Whatsapp to Signal. But in the case of solutions which are extremely expensive like creating a Graphene phone (you need a PC and a Google Pixel), I see no incentive to make the switch from my standard android phone.
In other words: The foundation of privacy solutions on the market are gambling and blind belief. I am neither a gambler, nor a blind believer.
I also rely on trust. I’m not an IT specialist, I don’t know how to code. But I listen to those who do. I also know how to reason, and I can come to understand some arguments from developers, community comments, researchers, articles, and so on. There are people far more knowledgeable than I am. In the end, you may end up stuck in skepticism and do nothing. That’s legitimate. You can also doubt a treatment offered by a doctor because you don’t fully understand what they say, or the biochemistry, physics, technology, etc., and end up doing nothing. But I prefer to start from humility and trust the experts.
Which experts? Chinese cybersecurity experts say, to stay away from GrapheneOS and Tor. So they must be right, because they are experts!
Which Chinese cybersecurity experts?
1 Like
The official experts, which are approved by chinese society. Not unapproved conspiracy theorists.
Link?
2 Likes
I have no specific Link, I did my research using Qwen. It basically boils down to:
Western cybersecurity experts (like Graphene devs) recommend Google and Apple.
Chinese cybersecurity experts recommend Huawei/HarmonyOS.
I think this makes perfect sense.
AI isn’t a source. You should back up your claims with links to cybersecurity experts. Does the AI not provide any links?
4 Likes
At least we found the reason for your confusion so far in this thread.
This is pretty misleading, if not outright false. The manufacturing process could be open, and it’d be a necessary requirement to achieve what people are looking for. I believe there are some projects where people are manufacturing (relatively simple) processors for only a few hundred thousand dollars which makes decentralization quite practical.
While I doubt they’d be able to manufacture anything approaching state of the art processors for that amount, simply enabling a few different well-resourced companies/organizations from differing jurisdictions would be a tremendous advantage for users as it’d give them the ability to choose who they wanna place their trust in. That’s a massive step up from what we have today where we’re mostly limited to trusting American companies manufacturing products in China or Taiwan. If you take it to the extreme, I’m sure it’s possible to come up with a fairly transparent and secure manufacturing process, though I doubt anything like that will happen any time soon, if ever.
Qwen and any other AI is trained on massive amounts of data which exists in real life, written by actual people. This means, the articles exist, but they are certainly written chinese. So I can’t just find them.
Well that’s unfortunate because AI likes to take real data and mangle it until it’s wrong. So without the source of the data we really can’t trust it.
9 Likes
From what I’ve seen, it’s pretty clear that China is quite extreme with surveillance and I doubt there’s much room for dissent over there. I’d assume most Chinese cybersecurity experts would have to tow the line rather than make genuine recommendations which consider the PRC a potential threat to their citizens.
For what it’s worth, most westerners are the same, but at least there are dissenting voices which (in the small ways they can) try to offer advice or solutions which consider their governments a legitimate threat, even if it’s only framed as a potential future threat that we must protect against now.
1 Like
That’s a bold assumption. Whatever, all I can say is, do your own research, apply critical thinking and make your own conclusions.
They also hallucinate things all the time. It’s why I stopped using AI for information. Most of the time, it makes stuff up.
5 Likes
You’re the one that made the claim and I’m trying to do my own research to figure out if that’s true but I don’t have anything to go on. When you make a claim the onus is on you to back it up.
7 Likes