@nprofile1q... Why is it that you take issue with how we're defending ourselves from this but don't take issue with their inaccurate claims about GrapheneOS and harassment towards our team? Have you ever spoken out about the harassment directed towards our team? Have you ever criticized any of these companies for the objectively false claims they make about GrapheneOS and our team? Why is it that your issue is only with us for how we choose to defend ourselves and respond to these attacks?

@nprofile1q... These companies don't stick to falsely marketing their products. They mislead people about GrapheneOS to steer people away from it and towards their products. Their products do not provide what they claim and their claims about GrapheneOS are highly inaccurate. They haven't kept to making inaccurate claims about GrapheneOS either. Both Duval and Braxman have repeatedly engaged in absolutely vile personal attacks where they push fabrications with the clear goal of increasing harassment.

@nprofile1q... We don't appreciate the founder and CEO of Murena repeatedly posting personal insults and libelous claims about the founder of GrapheneOS. That includes him repeatedly spreading harassment content. That includes doing things like linking to a neo-nazi conspiracy website making attacks on our founder based on fabrications.

https://archive.is/SWXPJ
https://archive.is/n4yTO

iodé is partnered with Robert Braxman who has pushed relentless fabrications about GrapheneOS to promote his products.

@nprofile1q... We don't appreciate Murena spending years falsely claiming GrapheneOS isn't a privacy project, isn't usable by regular people and lacks broad app compatibility. It's better at all of those things than their products, especially privacy and app compatibility. App compatibility is the main factor of usability in practice, and we're gradually working on providing a nicer out-of-the-box experience without simply bundling a bunch of third party apps with problematic approaches to privacy.

@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... You're continuing to lie about us and misrepresent what's actually happening. Our efforts at countering the false marketing from these groups and their recent efforts to put themselves in control of which operating systems people are allowed to use for European banking and governments apps are working out fine. Your efforts to attack us by misrepresenting what we're saying and doing along with the context for it are fruitless and not achieving anything. All you've gained is a ban.

@nprofile1q... We're opposed to it on privacy grounds rather than based on whether functionality is implemented using a neutral network. We don't have a fundamental issue with using entirely local neural networks for specific tasks such as auto-brightness, text-to-speech, speech-to-text, etc. However, GrapheneOS is open source and that means any included features implemented that way need to have open source training data rather than being so called open models which are in fact closed source.

@nprofile1q... We're opposed to it on privacy grounds rather than based on whether functionality is implemented using a neutral network. We don't have a fundamental issue with using a locally implemented neural network for specific tasks such as auto-brightness, text-to-speech, speech-to-text, etc. However, GrapheneOS is open source and that means any included features implemented that way need to have open source training data rather than being so called open models which are in fact closed source.

@nprofile1q... GrapheneOS has no analytics or telemetry. All of the default connections are documented at https://grapheneos.org/faq#default-connections. It doesn't include any kind of AI assistant and we would be strongly opposed to including any functionality based on those kinds of cloud services.

We're fine with having local implementations of features such as text-to-speech, speech-to-text and others which are not invasive, do not use a cloud service and do not persistently store data based on the inputs.

@nprofile1q... GrapheneOS has no analytics or telemetry. All of the default connections are documented at https://grapheneos.org/faq#future-devices. It doesn't include any kind of AI assistant and we would be strongly opposed to including any functionality based on those kinds of cloud services.

We're fine with having local implementations of features such as text-to-speech, speech-to-text and others which are not invasive, do not use a cloud service and do not persistently store data based on the inputs.

@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... We aren't part of a shared community and we're not on the same side. Volla, Murena and iodé trying to put themselves in the position of being the ones choosing which operating systems people are allowed to run on their devices is wrong. It's not a solution to the Play Integrity API but rather a new problem we'll be fighting against too. We aren't going to allow either Google or Volla to erode app compatibility with GrapheneOS without facing opposition and consequences.

@nprofile1q... It's not legitimate. The companies involved in it have atrocious security for their devices. They've created a system to permit using their own products while forbidding others. It's inherently not going to be neutral or fair. GrapheneOS isn't simply not going to participate but is going to actively fight against it. We're determining the best way to do that and one approach under consideration is a library banning any OS including Unified Attestation which we'll promote apps using.

@nprofile1q... @nprofile1q... There haven't been any internal power struggles and people engaging in years of extreme harassment and libel towards our founder and other team members is not simply personal insults. You're repeatedly misrepresenting what's happening and downplaying it. If you're not going to do basic research into what's happening and has been happening in the past then you're not in a position to leave any informed responses or advice. You're taking away from GrapheneOS development right now.