• Onno (VK6FLAB)@lemmy.radio
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    18 hours ago

    The separation between software and hardware is not nearly as distinct as your comment suggests. Beyond (sometimes replaceable) firmware there’s microcode and embedded systems with their own software inside modules like the modem that allows your phone to actually talk to the network.

    • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Those things are technically true but largely irrelevant.

      The concern about Google’s software is that the software that they produce which is targeted at consumers binds the user with a restrictive TOS which allows them access to all of your personal data. Their Play Services gives Google very low level access to the operating system and their cloud services are being constantly enshittified.

      So I avoid that software and those services.

      That doesn’t mean that every piece of software that Google produces is implicated. The teams writing low level firmware for optical fingerprint readers are not the ones developing consumer spyware.

      I’m concerned about security, I’m not an anti-Google zealot.

      • Agosagror@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        That said, I personally would love to see the day that fairphone or another company is able to support graphene.

        • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          Oh definitely.

          I don’t WANT to support Google, but unfortunately their hardware is superior for this purpose.

          The GrapheneOS devs have a public list of hardware requirements for any manufacturer that wants to support real security, so far only the Pixel checks all the boxes