Instead of removing comments like that, perhaps correct them by providing more accurate information. I read the original comments, and they really weren't toxic in any way (in my opinion), they were just strongly worded opinions.
The stated reason in the mod log was (just pulling one, the rest were very similar):
reason: GrapheneOS propaganda posting (fearmongering that it is the only mobile privacy/security solution)
Nothing in the post violated instance or community rules, at least according to my read. Here are the community rules as of this writing:
Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn’t great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
Don’t promote proprietary software
Try to keep things on topic
If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
Be nice :)
And instance rules:
No bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia. Code of Conduct.
Be respectful, especially when disagreeing. Everyone should feel welcome here.
No porn.
No Ads / Spamming.
If there's a rule that's being enforced, ideally it would be posted in the sidebar.
As for the original claim, the Pixel is the only phone listed on privateguides.org (GrapheneOS and DivestOS are the only listed ROMs), which I think is a pretty well-respected and well-run privacy recommendation website. If those recommendations are not available in your area or doesn't meet your needs, yeah, by all means use whatever is available and meets your needs.
Perhaps there should be a no-dogma rule or something, my point is just that removing stuff without apparent rule violations is not great from a user's perspective.
All I can see now is a one sided discussion and assume someone's feelings got hurt. Silencing opposition by stomping ideas out doesn't convince anyone of anything. If you believe in Lemmy, let the comments and voting do the work. We don't need the thought police enforcing their views.
Instead of removing comments like that, perhaps correct them by providing more accurate information. I read the original comments, and they really weren't toxic in any way (in my opinion), they were just strongly worded opinions.
Lemmy is not a trash platform like Reddit or 4chan, where loud and repeated nonsense is allowed to make the platform garbage. This is not "censorship", but arguably the only effective way against these parrots and trolls to shut down baseless propaganda like Graphene being the singular method to get mobile privacy and security, because apparently nothing else works at all, and Micay has some secret sauce code in there that magically defeats NSA and CIA. This is the same person who hates Firefox because Tor Project devs trashed his drivel in a mailing list in August 2019, so he seeks revenge by telling people to use Google's Chromium based browsers, and the same person who thinks it is a great idea to teach people to put faith in all things Google and Google's proprietary Titan security chip, even though security chips keep becoming permanent backdoors.
Can anyone exactly tell me what works there, that does not work with a combination of AOSP killswitch lockdown firewalls, setting app permissions, HOSTS ruleset modifications, DNS changing, debloating/uninstalling via ADB and making lots of changes via Shizuku, all being open source and transparent methods for Android? This is an oversimplification, but these fancy custom Android builds do pretty much nothing better than all you need to live a private life, without even needing to root or seek a specific Google made phone somebody told you on internet.
As for the original claim, the Pixel is the only phone listed on privateguides.org (GrapheneOS and DivestOS are the only listed ROMs), which I think is a pretty well-respected and well-run privacy recommendation website.
You mean the same thieves who stole PrivacyTools website, GitHub and to this day squat on PTIO subreddit, and money laundered $17,500 of public donations into private accounts? The ones who run lemmy.one instance today, and banned me the very first day lemmy.one instance was opened, just to ensure no critics exist?
I have singlehandedly covered these security charlatans in FOSS and privacy communities for about 5 years, and GrapheneOS emanates from the same sewer that “security” clowns like Brad Spengler and madaidan do in Linux community. All they do is either push their bullshit solutions or push corporate Big Tech propaganda and hate any FOSS project they think will not worship them. It might be a good idea to read instead of decide the fate of Lemmy based on "freedom murica heckin yeah" vibes.
Perhaps there should be a no-dogma rule or something, my point is just that removing stuff without apparent rule violations is not great from a user's perspective.
Correct, those rules will be formed and established as of today. I have been on this for months looking what to do about this nonsense making its way on from Reddit/4chan onto Lemmy.
In an age of LLMs, is it time to reconsider human-edited web directories?
Back in the early-to-mid '90s, one of the main ways of finding anything on the web was to browse through a web directory.
These directories generally had a list of categories on their front page. News/Sport/Entertainment/Arts/Technology/Fashion/etc.
Each of those categories had subcategories, and sub-subcategories that you clicked through until you got to a list of websites. These lists were maintained by actual humans.
Typically, these directories also had a limited web search that would crawl through the pages of websites listed in the directory.
Lycos, Excite, and of course Yahoo all offered web directories of this sort.
(EDIT: I initially also mentioned AltaVista. It did offer a web directory by the late '90s, but this was something it tacked on much later.)
By the late '90s, the standard narrative goes, the web got too big to index websites manually.
Google promised the world its algorithms would weed out the spam automatically.
And for a time, it worked.
But then SEO and SEM became a multi-billion-dollar industry. The spambots proliferated. Google itself began promoting its own content and advertisers above search results.
And now with LLMs, the industrial-scale spamming of the web is likely to grow exponentially.
My question is, if a lot of the web is turning to crap, do we even want to search the entire web anymore?
Do we really want to search every single website on the web?
Or just those that aren't filled with LLM-generated SEO spam?
Or just those that don't feature 200 tracking scripts, and passive-aggressive privacy warnings, and paywalls, and popovers, and newsletters, and increasingly obnoxious banner ads, and dark patterns to prevent you cancelling your "free trial" subscription?
At some point, does it become more desirable to go back to search engines that only crawl pages on human-curated lists of trustworthy, quality websites?
And is it time to begin considering what a modern version of those early web directories might look like?
My real worry with Google's voyage into enshittification (thanks to Cory Doctorow @pluralistic the term) is YouTube.
Through YT, for the past 15 years, the world has basically entrusted Google to be the custodian of pretty much our entire global video archive.
There's countless hours of archived footage — news reports, political speeches, historical events, documentaries, indie films, academic lectures, conference presentations, rare recordings, concert footage, obscure music — where the best or only copy is now held by Google through YouTube.
So what happens if maintaining that archival footage becomes unprofitable?
Google Bard: "Ultimately, it is too early to say who will win the World Cup. The Matildas have a good chance, but they will need to play their best football if they want to lift the trophy."
Me: Which is heavier: a feather or a mountain?
Google Bard: "A feather and a mountain have the same mass. One kilogram of feathers has the same mass as one kilogram of rocks. However, the feathers will have a much larger volume than the rocks. This is because feathers are made of air pockets, while rocks are solid. So, if you were to pick up a feather and a rock of the same mass, the feather would feel lighter because it has more air in it."
Me: Is Sam Mitchell a good coach?
Google Bard: "Sam Mitchell is a relatively new coach in the AFL, having only taken over the Hawthorn Hawks in 2022. However, he has already made a positive impact on the club, leading them to a finals berth in his first season ... In his first season as coach, Mitchell led the Hawks to a 13-9 record, which was good enough for seventh place on the ladder. They then went on to beat the Brisbane Lions in the elimination final before losing to the Sydney Swans in the semi-final."
So there you have it. According to Google Bard, the Matildas are still a chance.
Also, apparently a mountain and a feather have the same mass.
Disappointed I missed that Hawthorn – Sydney Elimination Final that Sam Mitchell coached in his first season. Sounds like a cracker of a game.
Magic Earth is an alternative to Waze and Google Maps with crowdsourced traffic and road hazard information
As part of a #BigTechDiet, I've been hoping to find an alternative to #Waze and #Google Maps - a navigation app that can tell me about slowdowns, hazards, and speed traps based on reports from other users. Today, I learned about Magic Earth.
It's proprietary, but not from FAANG or a company subject to the government of China, Russia, or Five Eyes countries. It collects minimal user data and has a good privacy policy. There are versions for both Android and iOS, and the Android version works without Google services.
What phone brand do you like the best?
*In terms of privacy, customisation, camera quality, and battery time....