the platform and devices are kinda counter to principles of privacy. the towers track you, "free" software where your data is the product, the panopticon of everyone having a camera... Places that need to actually be secure ban them. You can get by without a smart phone just fine if you have a regular computer but then you transfer all the vulnerability to that device, it's just not physically with you and you have a little bit better control over it if you know or care enough to make the efforts.
how can acknowledging reality be toxic? it would be nice if it were different, but they're right - smartphones are anathema to privacy as they exist today
Ok but this is like saying “I shouldn’t have to pay a 1/3 of my check to you” to your landlord and refusing to pay. You’re gonna end up on the street whether it’s true or not, until the security state and big tech is dismantled their phones are gonna be like this
Idk man by the company’s own admission it cant support a lot of the things people use smart phones for
If you depend on proprietary mainstream mobile messenger applications, banking applications, use loyalty or travel apps, consume DRM media, or play mobile video games on your fruit or Android smartphone, then the PinePhone Pro is likely not for you."
Like if you’re answer to “just use a dumb phone” is use one that’s this handicapped to the point it basically is a dumb phone with a touch screen then idk if it’s really there yet. (I am being somewhat hyperbolic here, I don’t want to split hairs about what counts as a smart phone I just mean it seems to be lacking functionality)
And a lot of the other solutions to this issue require a lot more tech competence than the average person has.
Edit: also isn’t saying “just use an obscure hong Kong produced device” the same kind of “go live in Afghanistan” kind of answer? Like you’ve done the same thing here but just with a slightly more advanced device
That is true. A lot of what makes smart phones invasive is built into the structures and networks; to interface with that system necessitates giving up privacy. The end user can mitigate it, but so long as the network exists in it's present form, it will always be a partial mitigation with diminishing returns the more you try.
I think it's also true that we should have these conversations about what could be. Especially with computers. These machines can be configured in practically endless ways, so it's pretty damn frustrating to see the scope of what is actually done with them get narrower and narrower.
Right. Like every thing that comes out that’s an alternative seems to be revealed at some point to be piggy backing off some system built by Google/whatever or just has some kind of backdoor for the cia (tor, signal).
I have my system pretty locked down on my computer but I think it’s at best naive to expect average users to jump through so many hoops with this thing. It’s like capitalism and everything else, the whole system needs retooling
also isn’t saying “just use an obscure hong Kong produced device” the same kind of “go live in Afghanistan” kind of answer? Like you’ve done the same thing here but just with a slightly more advanced device
Plus the original poster was freaking out about installing the Temu app for 15 seconds or whatever. Imagine convincing this person to buy a phone from a company based in China.
they can use the made in USA version of the librem5, a similar tho arguably worse device. The pinephone isn't a one off even if it is in an obscure niche
They have to make a lot of caveats because they constantly get people whinging that they can't install fb messenger or whatever or that their bank app doesn't support linux. The hw manufacturer can't help that and they are setting expectations appropriately for the state of the ecosystem currently. None of those things are inherent to the device or software stack
It isn't fair to say it's a dumbphone with extra steps just because of these things, in fact depending on adoption rates many of those things will eventually gain workarounds or supported applications, they just don't want users to buy it and get disappointed, whereas more technical users will buy it with the expectation of configuring or building their own workarounds/workflows. It will get more mainstream as the path gets more trodden by early adopters, similar to desktop linux which is now a near-trivial switch for many people.
A dumbphone can't do Signal, Matrix, email, hotspot, run a full web browser with full desktop addon support, listen to podcasts, music, maps, and more importantly, a dummbphone isn't a purposefully extensible platform for installing community or commercially created applications, both dedicated and adapted from desktop versions.
They aren't comparable. Linux mobile isn't as mature as android or ios, of course, but android and iOS also don't include banking apps, facebook messenger, netflix, travel/loyalty apps, etc. and didn't have most of those >10 years ago when they were less mature. They gained an available software ecosystem as they grew more popular over time.
Those things are still in the developer stage, nobody who's daily driving an iphone is going to switch to a half-broken linux device that isn't ready for the average person to use it.
It doesn't have to be, but it is the way it is. Acknowledging that isn't toxic at all, it's the correct materialist take. Nobody's saying smartphones can't be more secure, but they are not, so it would be ridiculous to behave as though they are.
The real toxic attitude is simply expecting everyone to have a smartphone. Stop trying to make me install an app or scan a QR code for everything. I've gone without using a smartphone for months at a time and I was fine. Pre-covid there were usually a couple times where some event or restaurant or work thing required some unnecessary app, but since covid I think people have gotten sick of this type of stuff and it's not as common. Worse case scenario just get a burner phone for when you're forced to use a smartphone.