updating understanding about grapheneos,
- Inicie sesión ou rexístrese para enviar comentarios
https://invidious.nerdvpn.de/watch?v=hITzs7OMDnM
Seems that it isn't hackable at this time.
People really tried their best and couldn't hack it according to this link.
My point is, whether it has non-free stuff or not, privacy is in fact possible with this device.
Security also,
freedom? Still miles better than regular android.
I think the best distros that free/libre software activists should recommend which are also according to the guidelines of this website, are the distros that are compliant with the GNU Free System Distribution Guidelines (GNU FSDG), and they are listed at two pages:
* For the ones which have GNU: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-distros.html
* For those which don't use GNU: https://www.gnu.org/distros/free-non-gnu-distros.html
That said, for recommending to others, it seems better to tell them about Replicant or some other of these distros that can be run on a mobile phone or tablet.
Of course you can use whatever you want, and so can the other person, but the difference is to what you recommend or present indirectly to the people involved.
The only cases for which it is ever a good thing to use a non-free software is basically to help develop a free/libre substitute; install a non-free software in order to enable imediate replacement with a free/libre one, even if this one doesn't have all the features; or run non-free JavaScript of websites just to make reports to the owner requesting them to free/liberate these according to GNU LibreJS, all these cases and other explanations can be seen at https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/is-ever-good-use-nonfree-program.html .
Keep in mind though, while you can use whatever you want, I recommend you to always take steps to advance on the ladder towards the freedom of the software you are using.
The trouble for me comes when, say there is a computer with libreboot as bios including requiring a blob, but...
it has immense security protections built into the hardware and no network stack backdoors due to disablement and compare it to a canoeboot or gnuboot device that while it has no blobs has very weak or not so great protections built in.
The freedom crowd would likely say to pick the freedom device.
But I find this approach very peculiar, because if the protections your freedom device has are very weak, then your going to lose your freedom due to hacking likely pretty easily.
And given this, what freedom do you really have once you been hacked?
This is basically just a theory of mine I had pondered in the past but not really thought very often.
But it still raises truth in it.
The moment you get hacked because weak protections, your freedom goes into the toliet.
I do hope that never happens to any users of libre bioses or libreboot. But I wonder to myself if this couldn't end up being the future at some point.
semi unrelated but,
ironically, the people using "linux" as they call it which is really GNU/Linux-libre as people here refer to it has gained significant traction thanks to windows 11's failures and microsoft's overall stubbornness.
I mention this because they are obviously seeking freedom, but not as much as me or you guys.
They aren't ditching non-free wifi or stock bioses to the same extent as people like myself which I consider questionable.
Still getting people off of proprietary malware OSes is always a plus
I think it grew to like 6% on desktop linux. I recall seeing Zdnet say that they detected that much traffic on their website once from **linux** again paraphrasing.
**gnu/linux-libre
*when i say blobs i mean, what the FSF considers blobs btw
It depends on what you mean by "freedom." Software freedom and device security are related but separate. Somebody with a hacked phone still has the freedom to run, examine, modify, and distribute free software.
It depends on how much control the hacking leaves you with.
If its ransomware, you have lost 90% of your freedom. ;)