Unless there is a real market advantage to it, they won't. Consumers prove over and over again they are willing to trade security to save a few dollars. Furthermore, why commit to providing hardware and software support for a device to last 5+ years, when ~25% of Americans report damaging their device each year[0]. Most of a device's population will have been replaced in 3 years.
Yeah unfortunately this is the case. Privacy and security in general are things most average consumers don’t necessarily care for, and especially don’t care for when it provides inconveniences. Even in more tech enthusiast crowds you see this reflected most obviously in people wanting to use Firefox over any Chromium variant of a browser.
Not to mention to reach GOS’ requirements the cost of the phone would have to significantly increase which I imagine only hurts Android phones even more for no real gain since GOS users are minuscule overall.
And the long term support is definitely not the norm yeah. It’s pretty much just Apple and Google doing it for their own devices. Motorola will be a newcomer to this concept with GOS. But we can only wait and see if they actually stick to it, given their track record prior to the collaboration.
Google probably got away with it cause they made the chips and security chips themselves. I read something like Tensor costing $70 vs. a Qualcomm chip with MTE costing $250.
But even with of all this, it wouldn’t make sense for GOS to spend it’s limited resources developing for a less secure platform when appropriate target devices exist (they mentioned something to this effect a few days ago on reddit too): https://www.reddit.com/r/GrapheneOS/comments/1wifsiq/comment...
You can disable system apps as long as they are not marked as critical or persistent apps that must be enabled for the system to work. adb pm disable --user 0 <whatever> is stronger the ui app info disable button.
>If the change contains changes to the UX it has to be approved by a human reviewer.
Would that not imply that a change that does not effect the UX does not have to be approved by a human reviewer? Otherwise, why specifically call out "changes to the UX" and not say "all changes"?
A small icon that blends into the background of the UI and easily missed when driving, is not the same as a pop-up/audio cue informing the driver their location is currently/recently being accessed remotely.
On behalf of all Americans, I would like to apologize that our propaganda prevented you from reading the article and understanding that the Museum has existed for his work for some time. Furthermore, I apologize that our propaganda is so strong that not even the Deutsche themselves could overcome it to learn about one of their own scientists, visit and financially support the museum of one of their countrymen.
I guess its only a matter of time until we put the final nail in Röntgen's coffin and the Deutsche finally start using the proper term: X-rays.
[0]: https://www.claimsjournal.com/news/national/2024/03/15/32248...
reply