cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ml/post/143981
Mod statement: https://np.reddit.com/r/PrivacyGuides/comments/rxf02a/theanonymousjoker_false_privacy_prophet/hs1dxux?context=3
https://i.imgur.com/LahmNkO.jpg
dng99/dngray has branded a citation-less slander post as facts. These are the “community standards” of r/PrivacyGuides. Always remember this.
u/trai_dep, the record stands corrected once again
Moreover, my theory about GrapheneOS community using sockpuppets is true, as confirmed by…
https://np.reddit.com/r/fdroid/comments/rxtc14/came_across_this_thoughts/hs1o6no?context=3
https://i.imgur.com/JX6uTpx.jpg
Tommy_Tran = B0risGrishenko (OP of slander post). Thanks for confirming my GrapheneOS community sockpuppet theory.
deleted by creator
Nice wordplay there. The only FUD I can see is that post with zero citations about my comments or posts, and the moderators of that community promoting it as facts, ignoring that there are zero citations made.
Hard evidence requires solid citations, not made up stories.
Interestingly, you want to “speak up” yet ignore the fact that that OP never cited the comments or posts I wrote to disprove my claims. This was also evident upon my simple confrontation about their argument they earlier had (regarding AOSP’s VPN killswitch feature), while purposely incorrectly citing events on a timeline to look correct. Moreover, later they exposed themselves as using an alt account, and trolled me on Matrix chat.
Speaking up is not a matter of practicing freedom of speech. It is also a matter of using it responsibly to stand for righteousness.
There are literally two screenshots of your comments in the original post on /r/PrivacyGuides.
Apparently you’re just sticking your head in the sand and refusing to admit you’re wrong.
Both the screenshots are completely factual. The Google one is non-debatable. Also, the “sandboxed play services” thing was something I did more than a year ago, and taught people with the 3.0 guide already. Those “high privileges” mean nothing compared to changing package permissions via AppOpsX via ADB commands. There goes the “highly privileged” thing down the drain.
The reality of “sandboxed play services” is that GrapheneOS just wanted to do marketing because everybody is moving away to CalyxOS for retained app functionality over what end up as a useless security ROM practically. People were fed up of their apps not working, and people were fed up of the unhelpful, toxic community. Stay angry.
I love how the comment literally above it was the final explanation by me, and the one you linked was a total weasel copout. A purposeful misquoting of Marcel (NetGuard dev) was done before the VPN killswitch feature came to AOSP by that B0ris/Tommy.
Also, nice promotion to moderator position after my harassment… are those the "community standards)?
deleted by creator
Prove what? I have an entire section in my guide “CRITICAL FOR CLIPBOARD, LOCATION AND OTHER APP FUNCTION BLOCKING”. I have had it since 3.0 guide for more than a year now.
The proof for people flocking away from GrapheneOS to CalyxOS is found everywhere as posts on r/PrivacyGuides and r/privacytoolsio (now freezed) and people in Techlore rooms that use CalyxOS. Everybody knows many apps cannot work as intended without Play Services or microG. And thus GrapheneOS now has “sandboxed play services” which basically took ZERO time to develop. Permission management of packages does not involve rocket science.
dngray's mod comment screenshot
https://i.imgur.com/LahmNkO.jpg
Allowing slander hoax = “community standards”. B0ris/Tommy after making that slander post was made moderator, interestingly. Almost as if this was the reward.
Go troll someone else. I do not tolerate trolling and baiting.
Edit: AppOpsX works offline and does not need updates. The AppOps mechanism has been in Android/AOSP since ICS/Kitkat days as a hidden developer feature.
deleted by creator
The guide is well tested and verified, and can be implemented by anyone, and so it can be tested as well. If the guide had issues, I would not be doing months of testing and publishing such a guide.
Again, as I have said many times, GrapheneOS itself is probably a fine custom ROM, but the developer’s vision is not exactly the best and I have plenty criticisms of it that many people tend to agree on. And the community is unhelpful and toxic, and everyone knows that well. This is enough to understand that there is almost no ROM support for its end users if they need to ask questions, because it will be considered “spam” and “petty trolling” and “character assassination” and whatever buzzwords GrapheneOS and PrivacyGuides admins/mods come up with.
Telling the less technical masses about how big bad bloody war it was to develop a feature that is essentially controlling app package permissions and working around Android System’s location module is very, very cheesy. I must admit, the advantage taken of masses’ ignorance here is exemplary. chef’s kiss
The purpose of the guide has been achieved largely, and will be achieved even further. My aim was to destroy privacy elitism and gatekeeping and the mentally taxing paranoia, and the popular notion among ordinary people that achieving great privacy, security and anonymity requires custom ROMs, not using any common apps, rooting, insane technical knowledge and lots of time investment. Ordinary people can enjoy same benefits as the “privacy elitists” without losing their minds and participating in cult worship of “privacy elitists”. (Oh, BTW here is a little bonus, I work with people that are far more “experts” than these two weird communities, including both people who actively use and who have stopped using GrapheneOS and have Pixels. And we do not like people messing around with privacy community.)
I get that moderation decisions in the GOS Matrix Space can be heavy-handed, and the accusations of raiding/sock puppets are thrown around too liberally, but you’re doing the exact same thing.