> Thats not an unfounded attack.
Have you got actual arguments and not just personal attack on me combined with the negation?
> completely wrong comparisons between GrapheneOS and GNU/Linux
Can you quote them?
> The statements that those other options are less secure are clearly backed up with technical information.
Which technical information? Security doesn't exist without a threat model, https://www.kicksecure.com/wiki/Threat_Modeling. I don't see one in the posts.
> public source availability just isnt the magic silver bullet you think it is.
FLOSS is certainly better to avoid backdoors, https://www.kicksecure.com/wiki/Malware_and_Firmware_Trojans...
> If the sideload restriction were to be put in AOSP you can remove that in a soft fork.
Until the code changes a lot, which will eventually happen.
> Best to judge individual posts on their merit
You didn't judge their post I linked on its merit. You just replied with a general statement basically saying that everything is complicated.
> Thats not an unfounded attack.
Have you got actual arguments and not just personal attack on me combined with the negation?
> completely wrong comparisons between GrapheneOS and GNU/Linux
Can you quote them?
> The statements that those other options are less secure are clearly backed up with technical information.
Which technical information? Security doesn't exist without a threat model, https://www.kicksecure.com/wiki/Threat_Modeling. I don't see one in the posts.
> public source availability just isnt the magic silver bullet you think it is.
FLOSS is certainly better to avoid backdoors, https://www.kicksecure.com/wiki/Malware_and_Firmware_Trojans...
> If the sideload restriction were to be put in AOSP you can remove that in a soft fork.
Until the code changes a lot, which will eventually happen.
> Best to judge individual posts on their merit
You didn't judge their post I linked on its merit. You just replied with a general statement basically saying that everything is complicated.