Apple, Google/Alphabet, Microsoft, those are some of the pupeteers. The Orange Pedo, The Guardians Of the Pedophiles (GOP) party, and the corporate Fascism Lite Democratic Party (we promise to build one concentration camp fewer than the GOP, so vote for us Dems) are the lackeys.
We have to be careful, because The Democratic Party is not a monolith. Some of the Dems are actually economic populists, which is a good thing.
This doesn't change the fact that most Dems are just the less angry, the slightly less brutal, and the smilier fascists who don't literally rape people usually, unlike the GOP who are pro-rape in addition to being against democracy and against The Constitution outright.
Hakeem Jeffries recently met with Jared Kushner to, you know, talk about things and to plot together.
How I wish that everything I wrote above was just a giant hyperbole. But, everything I say here is factual. This timeline has me feeling like I am taking crazy pills every day.
It's only a problem if you want to set up a good policy once and never touch it again.
Life doesn't work like that. "The problem with cleaning my room is that it gets dirty again." Well, duh.
Politics is a never ending process of vigilance and fighting. A policy should not be judged as "bad" simply because it requires vigilance and teeth at all times. Literally all good policies require now and will continue to require participation.
If AI makes Linus more (quantity) or more severely (quality) error-prone than without the AI, that, and only that is an argument against AI being a tech asset for Linus.
Just one bad Linux kernel commit slip up related to AI is not an argument.
That said, the macro impact of the AI data centers and AI on: electric power generation and grids, pollution (smelly exhaust, noise, CO2), fresh water demands, socioeconomic power imbalance exacerbation, surveillance capitalism, questionable military usages, rogue agentic AI doing hacks and crimes to fulfill oterwise legal/ethical objectives, AI chatbot relationship addiction, these are some of what I consider real and urgent problems with AI.
Single source hardware is a security liability. If Google does something to the hardware or firmware, the GrapheneOS project would be screwed. Google has already hobbled AOSP.
We cannot overly depend on Google's or any one company's good will.
I think GrapheneOS should think about gradually steering the project toward a basket of hardware companies. Shifting to Motorola is necessary in the near term, but the whole situation with Google's behavior needs to be a wake up call.
The software MTE support in the kernel apparently predates the hardware support of the same, based on the above link.
Admittedly I might be misunderstanding something here, my confidence level is only 65%.
p.s.: i just learned that this uses a lot of extra RAM compared to hardware MTE. there seem to be approaches to mitigate the RAM blow up, but this discussion is above my paygrade, so I have to bow out. That said, I think it is correct that the absense of hardware MTE should not be the end of the road for secure smartphone design.
(nothing I am about to say is necessarily personal; I am genuinely grateful for the link!)
Is there a table of these requirements as columns and vendors as rows?
I think most of this list is acquired by having a modern CPU or SoC, no?
Much of the list is software requirements.
There is one item that sticks out:
Support for disabling USB data and also USB as a whole at a hardware level in the USB controller
Just how much of the hardware list is satisfied by say having a Snapdragon SoC?
I would prefer if people said such and such vendor is missing such and such feature which we need. Always NAME the SPECIFICS. A link to a web page with the exact specifics missing for the most popular phones would help, imo. This is clear and educational. Instead we get "they don't got no good hardware maaaan." It's annoying. Looks handwavy even when it is not.
I appreciate the spirit of reistance, also +1 for the left hand path, however, the broader society needs a more solid solution to these privacy-invading and covertly installing apps. I get it you're doing the best you know how. I am in the same boat. But we need something more solid for the long term.
No shit. The billionaires at the top worry about public safety, would you believe it? (giant fucking sarcasm tag goes here for all my asperger ftiends)
Who owns the (fully paid up) phone that's in my hands right now? I try to tell myself I do, but...
AI could maybe help stress test the game before the final release. If AI were used like that, the game itself would likely not be considered slopified.
The dirty data centers, the RAM chip grab, the widening divide between the haves and the have nots being exacerbated by the billionaire AI ownership, these problems have to be addressed before I can even consider the other issues. AI as tech is usable, but as a socioeconomic phenomenon it is hugely problematic.
I apologise for a 2nd reply, I just wanted to clarify.
What I cannot readily control (or don't know how) is the internal hunger stemming from the soul (mine or enemy's).
But which hungers get to dominate in a public arena, I do have a say in that. So having some hunger may be inevitable, but making that personal hunger into an impositional system for everyone, that's not inevitable.
So yea, they want hardware attestation now. They're not relaxing until they find out what we do with the fingerprinting ecosystem first. That's laughable.
Since they're going to do what they're going to do, and since the outcome is never set in stone ahead of time but instead has to be discovered by living life, we have no reason not to chase our dreams and ambitions as much as they chase theirs. I have no reason to preemptively block or throttle my energy. I am not here to please any would be nannies. I have fears, but do not allow my fears to impact my logic. And besides I fear surveillance capitalism more than whatever else the "punishment" is promised to be.
You're saying hardware attestation is a looming punishment for poisonin fingerprinting.
Wrong.
The enemy wants hardware attestation now, and they want it bad. Nothing you do or avoid doing can influence this because they, the enemy, are responding to their own hungers.
I repeat, there are only two valid reasons to stop prosecuting a fight, and this isn't one of them.
You are offering an incorrect model of the enemy as a nanny who will try to shape my behavior in responce to my behavior. I "need" to please the nanny and I "need" to avoid pissing off the nanny. Your argument is designed for that sentiment: nanny-pleasing.
The correct model is one based on INTERESTS. The enemy has an interest in hardware attestation regardless of what we do or don't do. They will prosecute their interests KNOWING those are deeply unpopular. Look at the Guardians Of Pedophiles party, the GOP in USA. They are unpopular. They are hated. They KNOW this. They keep trucking. Why? The INTEREST didn't go away. The interest is not socially shaped, unfortunately (or fortunately?).
I am not even against the yacht money, just fucking STOP with the ARISTOCRATIC behaviors, dynamics, incentives.
I support a wealth cap ample enough to own a yacht, but not enough to make rogue aristocravcy viable. At least for now. The billionaires are doing everything they can to convince me that maybe even the yacht money is too much wealth holding.
Apple, Google/Alphabet, Microsoft, those are some of the pupeteers. The Orange Pedo, The Guardians Of the Pedophiles (GOP) party, and the corporate Fascism Lite Democratic Party (we promise to build one concentration camp fewer than the GOP, so vote for us Dems) are the lackeys.
We have to be careful, because The Democratic Party is not a monolith. Some of the Dems are actually economic populists, which is a good thing.
This doesn't change the fact that most Dems are just the less angry, the slightly less brutal, and the smilier fascists who don't literally rape people usually, unlike the GOP who are pro-rape in addition to being against democracy and against The Constitution outright.
Hakeem Jeffries recently met with Jared Kushner to, you know, talk about things and to plot together.
How I wish that everything I wrote above was just a giant hyperbole. But, everything I say here is factual. This timeline has me feeling like I am taking crazy pills every day.
It's only a problem if you want to set up a good policy once and never touch it again.
Life doesn't work like that. "The problem with cleaning my room is that it gets dirty again." Well, duh.
Politics is a never ending process of vigilance and fighting. A policy should not be judged as "bad" simply because it requires vigilance and teeth at all times. Literally all good policies require now and will continue to require participation.
Is Linus error-free pre-AI?
If AI makes Linus more (quantity) or more severely (quality) error-prone than without the AI, that, and only that is an argument against AI being a tech asset for Linus.
Just one bad Linux kernel commit slip up related to AI is not an argument.
That said, the macro impact of the AI data centers and AI on: electric power generation and grids, pollution (smelly exhaust, noise, CO2), fresh water demands, socioeconomic power imbalance exacerbation, surveillance capitalism, questionable military usages, rogue agentic AI doing hacks and crimes to fulfill oterwise legal/ethical objectives, AI chatbot relationship addiction, these are some of what I consider real and urgent problems with AI.
Single source hardware is a security liability. If Google does something to the hardware or firmware, the GrapheneOS project would be screwed. Google has already hobbled AOSP.
We cannot overly depend on Google's or any one company's good will.
I think GrapheneOS should think about gradually steering the project toward a basket of hardware companies. Shifting to Motorola is necessary in the near term, but the whole situation with Google's behavior needs to be a wake up call.
The lady with the toughest boostraps.
Apparently the Linux kernel can emulate MTE in software:
https://lwn.net/Articles/833353/
The software MTE support in the kernel apparently predates the hardware support of the same, based on the above link.
Admittedly I might be misunderstanding something here, my confidence level is only 65%.
p.s.: i just learned that this uses a lot of extra RAM compared to hardware MTE. there seem to be approaches to mitigate the RAM blow up, but this discussion is above my paygrade, so I have to bow out. That said, I think it is correct that the absense of hardware MTE should not be the end of the road for secure smartphone design.
I believe it was Axon.
https://dailycaller.com/2026/07/22/axon-lightpole-ubicquia-flock-surveillance-artificial-intelligence-ai-privacy-technology/
(nothing I am about to say is necessarily personal; I am genuinely grateful for the link!)
Is there a table of these requirements as columns and vendors as rows?
I think most of this list is acquired by having a modern CPU or SoC, no?
Much of the list is software requirements.
There is one item that sticks out:
Just how much of the hardware list is satisfied by say having a Snapdragon SoC?
I would prefer if people said such and such vendor is missing such and such feature which we need. Always NAME the SPECIFICS. A link to a web page with the exact specifics missing for the most popular phones would help, imo. This is clear and educational. Instead we get "they don't got no good hardware maaaan." It's annoying. Looks handwavy even when it is not.
We should consider divorcing Goggle from Android via something like GrapheneOS or /e/OS.
I appreciate the spirit of reistance, also +1 for the left hand path, however, the broader society needs a more solid solution to these privacy-invading and covertly installing apps. I get it you're doing the best you know how. I am in the same boat. But we need something more solid for the long term.
No shit. The billionaires at the top worry about public safety, would you believe it? (giant fucking sarcasm tag goes here for all my asperger ftiends)
Who owns the (fully paid up) phone that's in my hands right now? I try to tell myself I do, but...
Yea, I am not a happy camper.
I have a Moto phone, as far as I know they have made $0 from me in analytics or ads.
Moto phones in my experience are some of the most debloated phones out there.
I keep hearing this thing about the necessary hardware.
What is this exotic piece of hardware that the GrapheneOS needs? Please, someone tell me what it is.
AI could maybe help stress test the game before the final release. If AI were used like that, the game itself would likely not be considered slopified.
The dirty data centers, the RAM chip grab, the widening divide between the haves and the have nots being exacerbated by the billionaire AI ownership, these problems have to be addressed before I can even consider the other issues. AI as tech is usable, but as a socioeconomic phenomenon it is hugely problematic.
I apologise for a 2nd reply, I just wanted to clarify.
What I cannot readily control (or don't know how) is the internal hunger stemming from the soul (mine or enemy's).
But which hungers get to dominate in a public arena, I do have a say in that. So having some hunger may be inevitable, but making that personal hunger into an impositional system for everyone, that's not inevitable.
So yea, they want hardware attestation now. They're not relaxing until they find out what we do with the fingerprinting ecosystem first. That's laughable.
Since they're going to do what they're going to do, and since the outcome is never set in stone ahead of time but instead has to be discovered by living life, we have no reason not to chase our dreams and ambitions as much as they chase theirs. I have no reason to preemptively block or throttle my energy. I am not here to please any would be nannies. I have fears, but do not allow my fears to impact my logic. And besides I fear surveillance capitalism more than whatever else the "punishment" is promised to be.
Nothing is inevitable. Everything is negotiable.
With how things are going now, every day I am more amenable to this line of thinking.
Again we're back to bad fear-based logic.
You're saying hardware attestation is a looming punishment for poisonin fingerprinting.
Wrong.
The enemy wants hardware attestation now, and they want it bad. Nothing you do or avoid doing can influence this because they, the enemy, are responding to their own hungers.
I repeat, there are only two valid reasons to stop prosecuting a fight, and this isn't one of them.
You are offering an incorrect model of the enemy as a nanny who will try to shape my behavior in responce to my behavior. I "need" to please the nanny and I "need" to avoid pissing off the nanny. Your argument is designed for that sentiment: nanny-pleasing.
The correct model is one based on INTERESTS. The enemy has an interest in hardware attestation regardless of what we do or don't do. They will prosecute their interests KNOWING those are deeply unpopular. Look at the Guardians Of Pedophiles party, the GOP in USA. They are unpopular. They are hated. They KNOW this. They keep trucking. Why? The INTEREST didn't go away. The interest is not socially shaped, unfortunately (or fortunately?).
With the way things are going being pro-Constitution will soon be terrorism.
I am not even against the yacht money, just fucking STOP with the ARISTOCRATIC behaviors, dynamics, incentives.
I support a wealth cap ample enough to own a yacht, but not enough to make rogue aristocravcy viable. At least for now. The billionaires are doing everything they can to convince me that maybe even the yacht money is too much wealth holding.