The fallacy is that AOSP (which GrapheneOS forks from), and Chromium used to install it, are both dependendent on Google engineers, money, and the willigness to keep the platforms open, to some extent.
Is your alternative that someone should build a complete from-scratch alternative OS that can still be booted on the same hardware?
For the time being, AOSP and Chromium are still open source, so why not piggy-back off of all that labor and development to provide what GrapheneOS users want at minimal cost and effort?
If the source is fully open (it is) than detecting and disabling backdoors is completely possible. Not to mention the fact that other OS projects face the same risks.
If Google cuts development of AOSP in favor of some closed-source alternative, the GrapheneOS team could simply continue development of AOSP on their own.
This looks the same kind of situation when I noticed FOSDEM corridors started to be full of Apple laptops, but apparently the irony is lost on new generations.
I remember about 10 or 15 years ago somebody pointed out that a big chunk of the GNOME devs used Apple laptops, even at public appearances, and it answered a lot of my questions about the state of the project.
Imo, Graphene wants to be a "Google certified" ROM OEM, they don't make devices but software. A good and secure ROM for sure but they're still begging them for Play Integrity[1] and "sandboxing" GMS isn't fighting Google.
[1] https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/112878070618462132
The fallacy is that AOSP (which GrapheneOS forks from), and Chromium used to install it, are both dependendent on Google engineers, money, and the willigness to keep the platforms open, to some extent.
Is your alternative that someone should build a complete from-scratch alternative OS that can still be booted on the same hardware?
For the time being, AOSP and Chromium are still open source, so why not piggy-back off of all that labor and development to provide what GrapheneOS users want at minimal cost and effort?
Sailfish is alright.
If the goal is to be fully free from backdoors and development being cutted out at any time, yes.
If the source is fully open (it is) than detecting and disabling backdoors is completely possible. Not to mention the fact that other OS projects face the same risks.
If Google cuts development of AOSP in favor of some closed-source alternative, the GrapheneOS team could simply continue development of AOSP on their own.
A fallacy which the author acknowledges.
> "I guess the best way to degoogle right now is to buy from Google"
Google has a monopoly on sort-of-open-but-not-really smartphones. And interoperability on ARM desktop isn't looking pretty either.
This looks the same kind of situation when I noticed FOSDEM corridors started to be full of Apple laptops, but apparently the irony is lost on new generations.
I remember about 10 or 15 years ago somebody pointed out that a big chunk of the GNOME devs used Apple laptops, even at public appearances, and it answered a lot of my questions about the state of the project.
(and I say this as a user of GNOME)
Imo, Graphene wants to be a "Google certified" ROM OEM, they don't make devices but software. A good and secure ROM for sure but they're still begging them for Play Integrity[1] and "sandboxing" GMS isn't fighting Google. [1] https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/112878070618462132
"Taking legal steps" isn't "begging" though.