There are at least a dozen people spending at least several hours attacking GrapheneOS across platforms on a daily basis.
-
There are at least a dozen people spending at least several hours attacking GrapheneOS across platforms on a daily basis. It's a very strange situation. How do these people have so much time and dedication to keep making posts across platforms attacking us? It's relentless.
@GrapheneOS It's probably Google.
-
There are at least a dozen people spending at least several hours attacking GrapheneOS across platforms on a daily basis. It's a very strange situation. How do these people have so much time and dedication to keep making posts across platforms attacking us? It's relentless.
@GrapheneOS it's most likely their job at Google or Apple or within the government,.... they can't stand that you're not parasitic like they are.
-
@GrapheneOS I wouldn't assume they're people. Bullshit generators make it trivial to generate harassment these days.
@be They're definitely people but they heavily use LLMs to generate their attacks on GrapheneOS to make content which appears technical to mislead people.
-
@GrapheneOS @0bs1d1an i'm out of the loop, that seems wild, any legal action going on ?
-
@GrapheneOS It's probably Google.
@drewtowler No, it definitely isn't. In fact, the attacks on us have largely been put in motion by companies selling dubious products marketed as avoiding Google and giving people privacy. Those products don't actually provide what they're claiming they do and they feel very threatened by GrapheneOS. They've attacked us themselves and started their supporters going attacking us which they aren't capable of stopping even if they tried. They're doing the opposite of trying to stop it though.
-
@GrapheneOS it's most likely their job at Google or Apple or within the government,.... they can't stand that you're not parasitic like they are.
@KnobbyTiresOnly It isn't Apple or Google. In fact, the attacks on us have largely been put in motion by companies selling dubious products marketed as avoiding Google and giving people privacy. Those products don't actually provide what they're claiming they do and they feel very threatened by GrapheneOS. They've attacked us themselves and started their supporters going attacking us which they aren't capable of stopping even if they tried. They're doing the opposite of trying to stop it though.
-
There are at least a dozen people spending at least several hours attacking GrapheneOS across platforms on a daily basis. It's a very strange situation. How do these people have so much time and dedication to keep making posts across platforms attacking us? It's relentless.
@GrapheneOS I guess this is the proof, you guys are doing the things right!
-
@0bs1d1an On Reddit, an account blocking you prevents you from replying not only directly to them but to any of the replies to them. Malicious people were using this to cycle through new accounts blocking hundreds of people to prevent replying. They were heavily maliciously attacking GrapheneOS and our team in /r/privacy and elsewhere. /r/privacy mods were not addressing it, so we kept privately complaining t o them. They were never willing to seriously deal with the abuse of their community.
@GrapheneOS I'm sorry for all the shit you have to deal with.
I'm a very happy user of GrapheneOS (I also donated).
-
The largest privacy community on Reddit /r/privacy bans any discussion or mentions of GrapheneOS. A bot automatically removes any post mentioning GrapheneOS they'll very actively ban people who evade their filters. The mods of the subreddit misrepresent this as something we want.
@GrapheneOS How can I still take r/privacy serious when they treat the most secure mobile OS this way?
-
There are at least a dozen people spending at least several hours attacking GrapheneOS across platforms on a daily basis. It's a very strange situation. How do these people have so much time and dedication to keep making posts across platforms attacking us? It's relentless.
@GrapheneOS to be fair to them, it is not allowed to discuss any custom ROM. Not just GOS
-
There are at least a dozen people spending at least several hours attacking GrapheneOS across platforms on a daily basis. It's a very strange situation. How do these people have so much time and dedication to keep making posts across platforms attacking us? It's relentless.
@GrapheneOS if i remember the discussion about the os in france correctly there might easily be some paid actors among tose "critics" ... -
@GrapheneOS to be fair to them, it is not allowed to discuss any custom ROM. Not just GOS
@Lhyr The mods of /r/privacy specifically targeted GrapheneOS with this rule which is clear in their announcement. In their announcement, they claim to have implemented it to protect us. In reality, the mods are hostile towards GrapheneOS and one has even publicly participated in personal attacks on our team. The mod team misrepresented us wanting people to use our discussion forum instead of our subreddit as us not wanting people to be able to discuss GrapheneOS on Reddit which is nonsense.
-
@GrapheneOS The French Wikipedia page for GrapheneOS is currently the only accurate one and I am one of the contributors, another community member started rewriting the page, and I joined in. I haven't contributed to the page in quite a while, but everything looks fine to me.
The US page is managed by people hostile to GrapheneOS, as you already know. If you change the content, a member will revert your edit. I’ve tried several times with no success, it’s deplorable.
Attacks from scammers and companies selling snake oil seem to have intensified since the collaboration with Motorola Mobility. It’s absurd how many trolls and malicious people I see on X, and it’s almost impossible to respond to them all. This social network is terrible, I’ve rarely seen so much violent content on a platform, fortunately, there are also people who support the project.
@Xtreix
What kind of misinformation do you claim about the english Wiki page of GrapheneOS?
I've looked through a few edits and didn't find much that I would call malicious (other than one vandalism where Edward Snowden recommends Classic Amiga OS instead of GrapheneOS)
@GrapheneOS -
@Xtreix
What kind of misinformation do you claim about the english Wiki page of GrapheneOS?
I've looked through a few edits and didn't find much that I would call malicious (other than one vandalism where Edward Snowden recommends Classic Amiga OS instead of GrapheneOS)
@GrapheneOS@m1k3y @Xtreix It presents an inaccurate narrative about the origin of GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS was started in 2014. It's the direct continuation of the CopperheadOS project. We still have the original repositories from 2014 and 2015 on GitHub which are still relevant. It has an inaccurate narrative about our response to the massive escalated harassment towards Daniel in 2023 too. It's interpreting a primary source (incorrectly) which goes against Wikipedia policy and yet has been there for ages.
-
@m1k3y @Xtreix It presents an inaccurate narrative about the origin of GrapheneOS. GrapheneOS was started in 2014. It's the direct continuation of the CopperheadOS project. We still have the original repositories from 2014 and 2015 on GitHub which are still relevant. It has an inaccurate narrative about our response to the massive escalated harassment towards Daniel in 2023 too. It's interpreting a primary source (incorrectly) which goes against Wikipedia policy and yet has been there for ages.
@m1k3y @Xtreix Why is there a separate article for the original name of the GrapheneOS project which presents it as a product from a company and yet it predates the company existed and was renamed to GrapheneOS? It's because Copperhead heavily edited Wikipedia prior to their business collapsing due to us preventing them continuing to fork our code on a yearly basis. Copperhead made a fork of GrapheneOS in 2018, not the other way around. Wikipedia presents a false narrative from them.
-
@Lhyr The mods of /r/privacy specifically targeted GrapheneOS with this rule which is clear in their announcement. In their announcement, they claim to have implemented it to protect us. In reality, the mods are hostile towards GrapheneOS and one has even publicly participated in personal attacks on our team. The mod team misrepresented us wanting people to use our discussion forum instead of our subreddit as us not wanting people to be able to discuss GrapheneOS on Reddit which is nonsense.
@GrapheneOS they must have deleted the announcement where they said that. I can't find it (or I just suck at searching
)I genuinely hope they've stopped misrepresenting you now. Anyway, from my experience, they deleted all my comment, whether I named GOS or other privacy minded roms like Calyx or Iodé.
They treat everyone equally now it seems (publicly at least). I still think it's a shame they ban that kind of conversation
-
@KnobbyTiresOnly It isn't Apple or Google. In fact, the attacks on us have largely been put in motion by companies selling dubious products marketed as avoiding Google and giving people privacy. Those products don't actually provide what they're claiming they do and they feel very threatened by GrapheneOS. They've attacked us themselves and started their supporters going attacking us which they aren't capable of stopping even if they tried. They're doing the opposite of trying to stop it though.
@GrapheneOS it's unfortunate, too many dirtbags in this world.
On the other hand, I can barely wait for the Motorola that is in the works with Graphene OS and possibly pre installed right out of the box, I seen a video about it from my favourite source for tech info on Youtube, Sam Bent. -
@GrapheneOS The French Wikipedia page for GrapheneOS is currently the only accurate one and I am one of the contributors, another community member started rewriting the page, and I joined in. I haven't contributed to the page in quite a while, but everything looks fine to me.
The US page is managed by people hostile to GrapheneOS, as you already know. If you change the content, a member will revert your edit. I’ve tried several times with no success, it’s deplorable.
Attacks from scammers and companies selling snake oil seem to have intensified since the collaboration with Motorola Mobility. It’s absurd how many trolls and malicious people I see on X, and it’s almost impossible to respond to them all. This social network is terrible, I’ve rarely seen so much violent content on a platform, fortunately, there are also people who support the project.
@Xtreix @GrapheneOS Your edit had the pretty big problem of replacing sourced content with unsourced content that sometimes uses buzzwords, after which you didn't engage in [discussion the revert pointed you to](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:GrapheneOS/Archive_4#Special:Diff/1324505725). That said, the sources in the article do seem enough to say that Micay was a co-founder and that gOS is meant to be the very similar successor to Copperhead. Without contradicting information from other editors I'm sure I can add this.
-
@Xtreix @GrapheneOS Your edit had the pretty big problem of replacing sourced content with unsourced content that sometimes uses buzzwords, after which you didn't engage in [discussion the revert pointed you to](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:GrapheneOS/Archive_4#Special:Diff/1324505725). That said, the sources in the article do seem enough to say that Micay was a co-founder and that gOS is meant to be the very similar successor to Copperhead. Without contradicting information from other editors I'm sure I can add this.
> That said, the sources in the article
Articles based on press releases and Wikipedia aren't reliable sources. Laundering inaccurate content through authors of articles taking Wikipedia claims at face value isn't acceptable.
> gOS is meant to be the very similar successor to Copperhead
GrapheneOS is not a successor to CopperheadOS. GrapheneOS is the direct continuation of the open source project formerly known as CopperheadOS. There's plenty of verifiable info proving it.
-
> That said, the sources in the article
Articles based on press releases and Wikipedia aren't reliable sources. Laundering inaccurate content through authors of articles taking Wikipedia claims at face value isn't acceptable.
> gOS is meant to be the very similar successor to Copperhead
GrapheneOS is not a successor to CopperheadOS. GrapheneOS is the direct continuation of the open source project formerly known as CopperheadOS. There's plenty of verifiable info proving it.
@GrapheneOS @Xtreix It would be very helpful for the encyclopedia to know these sources! That's the hardest part of writing any Wikipedia article content, imo.
Golem Magazine appears to have had close communications with Micay and done their fact-checking. The article links an archived copy of Micay's own r/android post saying "true successor of CopperheadOS", so I'm curious to know what's the case here. Isn't "successor" and "continuation" the same thing?
