Graphene recommending this at all is extremely sus. My objective of using your operating system is to avoid giving Google any information I possibly can. Don’t know why they always recommend using Google shit in a sandbox like those packets aren’t still coming from my IP.
Its not sus. They’re just hyper-aware of security. And Aurora is just not terribly secure. Its just that you’re now choosing between privacy and maximum security. And I prioritize privacy, personally.
I agree. Specifically, it’s privacy AND freedom (free software development model).
If these two are against maximum security, GrapheneOS consistently chooses security. Which is unfortunate for me, because I would consistently choose freedom. (Especially due to long-term considerations.)
You can disregard their recommendation if you wish, I do sometimes. If they were here, I imagine they’d say they don’t see privacy and security as contradicting each other, just that there are different threat models. I think they subscribe to the idea that not everyone is going to be sufficiently informed in order to make a rational judgement, so instead they default to lowering potential risk. They do value accessibility for the tech illiterate as well.
The Play Store requires a Google account. Using a second profile is extremely inconvenient.
Graphene recommending this at all is extremely sus. My objective of using your operating system is to avoid giving Google any information I possibly can. Don’t know why they always recommend using Google shit in a sandbox like those packets aren’t still coming from my IP.
Its not sus. They’re just hyper-aware of security. And Aurora is just not terribly secure. Its just that you’re now choosing between privacy and maximum security. And I prioritize privacy, personally.
They pretty much only recommend Accrescent.
I agree. Specifically, it’s privacy AND freedom (free software development model).
If these two are against maximum security, GrapheneOS consistently chooses security. Which is unfortunate for me, because I would consistently choose freedom. (Especially due to long-term considerations.)
You can disregard their recommendation if you wish, I do sometimes. If they were here, I imagine they’d say they don’t see privacy and security as contradicting each other, just that there are different threat models. I think they subscribe to the idea that not everyone is going to be sufficiently informed in order to make a rational judgement, so instead they default to lowering potential risk. They do value accessibility for the tech illiterate as well.