GrapheneOS doesn't give you root access, citing security issues it introduces. You could re-compile your own copy with root access, though not sure if we'll then be back to some non-certified OS that can't make payments...

Yikes. Nevermind. The whole phone security model is one of the worst things to happen to computing, the concept that you shouldn't own your device for safety is so fucked.

> the concept that you shouldn't own your device for safety is so fucked.

That's not it. The concept is "if you choose to install this particular OS on the device you own, then it comes with this particular security model". That's totally fine. If you own your device, you can run Linux on it and you'll have root access.

"Not owning your device" means "not being able to install the OS you want on it". I want to own my device, obviously. But it does not mean that I own the developers of every OS in the world and that they should do whatever I tell them to do, for free.

I mean sure but I should be able to have DMA on some level, like I should be able to rootkit whatever software on my device, because it's on my device.

A non rooted device is NOT really my device, just seems like a leased device.

If we want to use banking app we have to use a non-rooted/leased device. That is what is really messed up. Personally I only use bank now that has website for banking. If they don't have a web site only app, then it is a red alert for the company.

I think is great, if there are no ramifications when skilled people unlock it.

There's just too much hacking going on, malicious behaviour, to allow uneducated masses to have root on a phone. I've seen so many people just not understanding the outcome of their actions. You'd get people rooting because some shady app lied about why, and just wanted control.

And we don't need more botnets. And it's why banks sometimes throw a fit.

So if a recompile does the trick, and no downside, then it'd be fine.

Lots of freedoms have downsides that are outweighed by the upsides, I'm absolutely unconvinced that the line lands on the far side of allowing you to control your phone.

You can control your phone, it's just your bank won't allow your phone to store EMV keys if it's a non-locked down environment.

Android is not UNIX, and that's a good thing. The root account was a historical mistake and not having access to it doesn't mean you don't own your device. That mindset is just trying to project how things worked with a half century old operating system with how modern operating systems work.

Let me guess - you like Apple?

I think they build good products and their operating systems are ahead of their competitors in the space.

What a disgusting take. It's actually so depressing to see anyone say this, presumably sincerely. It's how all the modern operating systems I use work.

It's what makes computers so wonderful and powerful, you can just have it do whatever you want. Turning that into "whatever google decides i should be allowed to do" is not gonna lead us to a bright future.

With Turing completeness you can do whatever computation you want. If you want to go outside of Turing completeness and starting interacting with the real world or other apps that is when security models need to exist. There isn't a reason to allow a program to act however it wants. Why should we allow for programs to secretly spy on a user's mic with no visual indication. It's okay to bound what is possible with a device. This already happens in practice with other operating systems. Redhat can still be useful even if you don't have permission to write new CPU instructions (only Intel and Amd have they signing keys to add new instructions). Sure Intel may be limiting what you can do, but it still is a useful machine without it that many people successfully use and gain value from every day. Even as a smaller example root on Linux has limits on how it can interact with the kernel. It may be root, but there are still limits on what it can do without loading a kernel module to modify things. If you want a less secure operating system where things are less secure like allowing the user to be spied on you can make your own, but the average person wants to have a secure device.

Yeah and security models are fine. Having root on my device isn't the same as running everything as root. e.x. I want to access my files on my device over SSH so i don't have to keep plugging my phone in, sadly turing completeness doesn't get me there when I can't give my SSH daemon access to the filesystem. These are all solved problems, we're just CHOOSING not to expose the solutions to the end user under the guise of security in order to retain control.

Making it so that you can't overly share data with apps is not an issue with root not being available. That is an issue with the capabilities the os exposes to you.

The answer to every security issue not "add a backdoor".

What do you mean it's not an issue with root not being available. Root solves the problem, that's the whole point, when the OS doesn't expose the capability I want I can just read the file or piece of memory. The reason for root is that I want to have the failure mode be "ugh i have to go deal with the root security i've elected to have to do XXXX" rather than "well i guess i'm sol"

>You could re-compile your own copy with root access, though not sure if we'll then be back to some non-certified OS that can't make payments...

GrapheneOS is already non-certified, for most apps that care, because it can't pass STRONG_INTEGRITY with play protect.

This applies to most Smeg products. Which is a shame, they used to be really good and long-lasting.

I can't speak to their quality, but every time I see their name, I wonder about how they're received in England: Americans might generally be unaware, but "smeg" as a name doesn't land well there, as I understand it.

A UK comedy called RedDwarf used variations of smeg as a mild expletive quite liberally. When asked some of the producers claimed they made it up to get around broadcast rules, but most people think it's a shortening of smegma.

This is the same for every internet service, and the primary experience when signing up to big centralised services like Facebook, LinkedIn or Twitter. If they think your account is suspicious in any way, instantly gone with no way to appeal, I've seen a number of friends experience this recently and they're not even outliers using a VPN or 'unusual' email or anything. At least with federated services, you have the opportunity to keep backups of your profile and sign-up with another instance whenever you want.

You can, but you need to be on an instance, go to https://loops.video for that experience. joinloops.org is more of an onboarding site it seems

This is the same philosophy as the creator, the sign-up flow does not ask you to select a server it defaults you to loops.video Maybe the app is different? I haven't tried it yet

All dozen of them :(

Their number doesn't really matter. You can choose to use one; I did.

If they turned out to be magic I'd be more surprised

I do a similar thing but use the start menu search, Ctrl-C, WIN, Ctrl-V, Ctrl-A, Ctrl-X. You can do it all in one hand and can get really fast, assuming the start menu doesn't lag behind. There's also the downside that it publishes all of your clipboard content to Bing search so maintain vigilance for confidential data...

Have you tired using the run action instead to clean the data? Win+r

Looks incredible, well done

I do, I buy albums on Bandcamp, rip my CDs, and as a last report buy MP3s on Amazon, which are surprisingly DRM free.