thank you, i think i saw that somwhere before. is it really true that the haressment is made up? like i honestly dont know

The one making the claims should provide the evidence.

and does it really has an impact on the eco system? i never really thought abou it…

Yes, it pushes for a Google monopoly in hardware, it creates a false narrative that there is no difference in privacy and/or security between alternative Android versions and ones by vendors. This further entrenches Google's control of Android as it limits the options for Android users.

And i guess fair point that this is a security flaw considering the phone users beeing targeted… But like i still kinda think hardware backed security is important and also very crucial is, that the more devices they supporty the less recourses they have… I think considering how long it is since pixel 10 released and it is still not supported, would make me guess that they dont have like any free time really to do it at all ^^

I do believe Google has taken decisions that forced them to look for a new OEM, I am not sure if does affect the Pixel 10.

No GrapheneOS is not just calling them out on lack of security.

It's apparently from their discord, so it took me a while to find it again.

It's not about the personality of it's directors, it's about it's effect on the (alternative) Android ecosystem as a whole, which is not just about security but also privacy and user control.

Even with regards to security, their choice of limiting devices apparently makes their users targets for extra scrutiny and harassment. That does have actual implications for people whose threat model includes authorities unless they already are guaranteed to be targets.

I don't need a phone, GrapheneOS needs one now that Google is trying to force them out. I wonder if their new phone will actually meet all the requirements, if it comes out.

As for complaining, GrapheneOS is the one bitching about other Android versions existing since forever. Now, they 've started making unsubstantiated claims of them attacking them somehow.

Yes, before Google made phone on it's own they supported some Nexus devices (google-partnered) and the Samsung Galaxy S4.

No it's not. This is a recent development that has not yet actually come to fruition. It may exist in 2026.

Before that GrapheneOS dismissed any idea of targeting other phones than the ones build by one of the most anti-privacy companies on earth, that seeks to consolidate control of Android.

In my opinion both the evident ego of of the project lead as well as his naivety (tethering the project to Google) are huge red flags despite any assumed technical superiority.

Existing, probably.

Is your opinion that advocating for jury nullification would constitute some violation of Dutch, Finnish or German law based on legal advice?

Its an incredibly pro US biased instance despite not being hosted in the US and having a .world domain.

Greatest hits are politics@lemmy.world forbidding non-US topics and of course news@lemmy.world and its bias check bot according to which every non US media is left wing biased.

As long as a standard "unblessed" usb-c cable will work fully with the phone it's non-issue.

It should then refrain from from posting on non US-media sources and/or stories and/or communities.

Of course it won't. It's purpose is to promote it's owners US-centric political window.

It's spamming political propaganda ,dressing it up as 'facts', and it's getting it's just deserts.

Nope he is just a rich spoiled manchild on cocaine.