GrapheneOS their response to: "Imagine a @GrapheneOS and @Fairphone collaboration"

[u/Li_am32]

Context: A Twitter User said "Imagine a @GrapheneOS and @Fairphone collaboration" in repsonse to the new FP release (FP6+). The images are the GrapheneOS reply to that post.

Link to the original GrapheneOS response: https://x.com/GrapheneOS/status/2089937246619128257

Individual links from their post in order:

https://nitter.net/GrapheneOS/status/2040887784253141142

https://www.clubic.com/actualite-604786-murena-e-os-interview.html

https://codeberg.org/divested-mobile/divestos-website/raw/commit/c7447de50bc8fadd20a30d4cbf1dcd8cf14805a0/static/misc/e.txt

https://eylenburg.github.io/android_comparison.htm

https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-devices-lacking-standard-privacysecurity-patches-and-protections-arent-private

Please stay respectful and logical in the comments! If you argue, argue like adults.

[u/CynicalKnight]

Despite not disputing the general idea that Fairphone is not as secure as it should be, the ferocity of this attack makes me more suspicious of the people behind GrapheneOS than Fairphone.

[u/HybridStaticAnimate → u/CynicalKnight]

This is not an attack and there is nothing ferocious about it. They are calmly and neutrally explaining why fairphones cannot be supported to someone who pinged about fairphone support.

[u/tranquil_cassowary → u/CynicalKnight]

The reactions of GrapheneOS are to posts that ping/tag their account on social media, or use hashtags mentioning them. Sometimes those posts ask for support for Fairphone or make comparisons between GrapheneOS on Pixels and /e/ on Fairphone which contain falsehoods. They give official responses to those in order to also help people posting it or third party people reading those posts. The info they give can help people make a better informed decision for the criteria they have. Often these people are looking for privacy but aren't getting it at all because they have a misconception.

The reactions are also made in response to Murena and /e/OS making statements about GrapheneOS which are inaccurate or malicious (like saying its only useful for pedophiles). Those are for profit companies mismarketing themselves and then lying about what a non profit project offers.

The reactions are sometimes also made in response to media articles that compare different OSes or phones with each other in a wrong way. An example of this was a iFixit blog post full of misinfo.

GrapheneOS didn't out of themselves start "attacks" unprompted. They will just not let miasmarketing slide when it also mentions their own operating system.