• qualia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    For completeness here goes the best steelman against GrapheneOS’ abstention I could summarize. Am I missing any other considerations because this is not strong:

    Despite age verification laws empirically not working (VPN use just skyrockets), Rawls would argue that civil disobedience requires visibility and the acceptance of associated consequences. Anonymously non-complying against a democratically enacted US law lacks this structure. This makes it more akin to evasion, which doesn’t mean it’s necessarily wrong, it just weakens its high ground status.

    • DahGangalang@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 hours ago

      I don’t live in an area under the jurisdiction of any of these laws.

      Despite this, were I on stock android, I would probably need to have the means for services I use to gather more information about me, regardless of my consent to their collection. Additionally, I am legally an adult, as is everyone in my household; we have no intention of having anyone in our household under the age of 18.

      Graphene OS offering a way for me to not need to comply with a law I am not governed by. Any safety argument would not apply to us even if we were governed by any such law.

      With all that, I fully support such actions by OS providers.