The popular belief that iPhone is a privacy alternative to Android is wrong.Support independent research and analysis by joining my Patreon page: https://www...
Did you watch the video? The Android Open Source Project isn’t owned by Google. Even if it was, the point of the video is that you have the choice not to use Chrome or any other Google service on android. Android offers about the same average base level of privacy and security as iOS does, but with much more potential. That ranges from uninstalling Google apps to flashing custom ROMs like GrapheneOS.
The Android Open Source Project isn’t owned by Google
One of those things that technically is true but in practice it isn’t. Just like chromium. Google is the main influencer of the project and it’s naive to think otherwise.
Just correcting because your comment insinuated that google doesn’t have significant influence over android, which is far from the truth. They could as well own it.
I didn’t mean to dispute or address the rest of the comment.
Fine. But you can’t obviously say Android is somehow better at privacy when its biggest contributor to the code and ecosystem is a fucking indecisive ad company.
An evaluation of good or bad an OS is for privacy should first and firemost focus on the actual OS, not the biggest contributer. It is an important point, and it would be way way more important if Android wasn’t open source. But it is, and it can easily be checked by security researchers. So saying Google bad (which I agree with ftr), and everything Google touches bad, would not only exclude you from many open source projects like linux, it would also not be a good aporoach to make a good, informed choice about your digital life.
If we judge Android on its own, yes, it can be incredibly safe and secure for its open source abilities. But that conventionally ignores everything else. Google pushes Android forward, Google creates the SDKs, Google creates the IDEs, Google creates all the non-phone variants of the OS. Android isn’t on GitHub, it’s on Google’s servers. “Biggest contributor” is an understatement.
oh, so it’s one of those videos that tell us, that the underlying project is not bad at all, but like 98% of all installations are riddled with invasive or outright privacy hostile software because it get’s GOOGLED before shipping unless i install a rom that’s not compatible with most devices and that i have to throw money at google to buy a pixel to escape the botnet i just paid for to check in?
The comparison is between Android and iOS, not Android and some fictional perfectly-private-and-secure-by-default OS. Even if you don’t want to put GrapheneOS on your phone, on Android you can very easily take steps that take you further than would be possible on iOS.
i’ve read the transcript and it’s a superficial, biased video about how grapheneos is better than ios because … well, because they say so, leaving out all the inconvenient stuff.
So you’re not just of the opinion that Android isn’t more private and secure than iOS, but GrapheneOS isn’t as well?
In this case I don’t think taking this any further makes much sense. It isn’t my data and security at risk. I just sincerely hope that you don’t have too severe of a threat model.
Chrome has nothing to do with this video.
It is on the subject of privacy. Chrome and Android are owned by the same company.
Did you watch the video? The Android Open Source Project isn’t owned by Google. Even if it was, the point of the video is that you have the choice not to use Chrome or any other Google service on android. Android offers about the same average base level of privacy and security as iOS does, but with much more potential. That ranges from uninstalling Google apps to flashing custom ROMs like GrapheneOS.
One of those things that technically is true but in practice it isn’t. Just like chromium. Google is the main influencer of the project and it’s naive to think otherwise.
Never said Google wasn’t the main influencer. Doesn’t change anything about what I said.
Just correcting because your comment insinuated that google doesn’t have significant influence over android, which is far from the truth. They could as well own it.
I didn’t mean to dispute or address the rest of the comment.
Ok, that’s fair:)
Who contributes the most to Android and push forward new releases?
Google. I never said otherwise and it doesn’t change anything about what I or THO said.
Fine. But you can’t obviously say Android is somehow better at privacy when its biggest contributor to the code and ecosystem is a fucking indecisive ad company.
Do you not understand the meaning of “open source”?
An evaluation of good or bad an OS is for privacy should first and firemost focus on the actual OS, not the biggest contributer. It is an important point, and it would be way way more important if Android wasn’t open source. But it is, and it can easily be checked by security researchers. So saying Google bad (which I agree with ftr), and everything Google touches bad, would not only exclude you from many open source projects like linux, it would also not be a good aporoach to make a good, informed choice about your digital life.
If we judge Android on its own, yes, it can be incredibly safe and secure for its open source abilities. But that conventionally ignores everything else. Google pushes Android forward, Google creates the SDKs, Google creates the IDEs, Google creates all the non-phone variants of the OS. Android isn’t on GitHub, it’s on Google’s servers. “Biggest contributor” is an understatement.
Is this about how private and secure the actual usage of the actual OS is, or what?
Then Linux is spyware trash because the largest contrabuters are corporations. 🤦🤦♂️🤦♀️
Your logic makes no sense.
oh, so it’s one of those videos that tell us, that the underlying project is not bad at all, but like 98% of all installations are riddled with invasive or outright privacy hostile software because it get’s GOOGLED before shipping unless i install a rom that’s not compatible with most devices and that i have to throw money at google to buy a pixel to escape the botnet i just paid for to check in?
Maybe, dunno, just watch the video?
The comparison is between Android and iOS, not Android and some fictional perfectly-private-and-secure-by-default OS. Even if you don’t want to put GrapheneOS on your phone, on Android you can very easily take steps that take you further than would be possible on iOS.
i’ve read the transcript and it’s a superficial, biased video about how grapheneos is better than ios because … well, because they say so, leaving out all the inconvenient stuff.
So you’re not just of the opinion that Android isn’t more private and secure than iOS, but GrapheneOS isn’t as well?
In this case I don’t think taking this any further makes much sense. It isn’t my data and security at risk. I just sincerely hope that you don’t have too severe of a threat model.