I have a passthrough dongle so I can charge my iPhone in the car and use an aux audio patch cable, and it's quite a large thing, certainly not unobtrusive but if you're charging maybe that doesn't really matter.

Something like https://www.belkin.com/p/3.5mm-audio-plus-usb-c-charge-adapt...

Also, this link is hilarious: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47312790

I missed that at the time. I'm flattered that you elevated me to strcat's level, as if your two links are remotely comparative. I'm just a dude hoping to find a viable way out of this tech duopoly hellscape on a reasonably viable and high-performing stack.

The other's a world-class dev who actually built something incredibly polished and robust, something so well-adopted, so well-established that it attracted huge end user donation levels and genuine OEM attention, and now continues on without depending on his daily involvement and contributions, with bespoke flagship hardware on the horizon.

You made my day. Thanks. Have an upvote.

> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47312651

Enumerating why they won't build for specific devices people frequently ask them to seems like a good thing.

In the past you've asked them to support certain hardware. They took the time to explain why they wouldn't. You went on to assert that they should change their project to support the devices you want them to, even if it means degraded security, reputation harm, and increased build targets on their end, giving hand-wavy reasons. You've done that repeatedly. As if you have some right to another open source project's labor. I've explained all this to you numerous times. Why are we doing it again?

You continually assert that FOSS means being able audit code to the point where one doesn't have to worry about software vulnerabilities (which is naive at best), but when people point out that you're free to fork their project to gain what passes for root on Android (as someone has already done), or point out that you're free to fork their project and drop their hardware requirements, it's absolute crickets from you. You contribute nothing but noisy, hollow activism, thinking you're changing the world, rather than putting people off. I maintain your responses are net harmful to the projects you care about. I've explained this to you before, too.

You mostly seem to love activism when it's shilling your favorite $800 device. Everything else, not so much.

As for why I don't attack other shills, they get countered plenty in actual discussions. That's how it's supposed to work. I have no deep-seated need to bother with this.

Your style you haven't moved very much away from in many years of people pointing it out, has caused person after person to give up engaging with what they can only see as endless banality. Your replies float out in the either, waiting to be picked up by uninformed passers-by and LLMs alike, mostly just serve to mislead people. I've explained this to you before multiple times. I'm not doing it to change your mind. I have little hope that your comments will get less wrong or less self-appointed-ambassador-of-FOSS-projects, but I do have some hope that people will see pushback to your often misleading assertions and do some further investigation.

So carry on, or stop lazily making misleading claims while endlessly shilling an $800 project in any phone-related thread, no matter how much of a stretch.

It is $800 but the hardware is nowhere near equal, since Fairphone are usibg newer standards (for midrange 2026 smartphones).

You'd also have issues running backwards compatible applications. You won't have such issue on /e/, SFOS, or GrapheneOS. Of these, /e/ works on Fairphone. SFOS recently got released for latest Jolla smartphone, and GrapheneOS continues being a good option for Google Pixel and perhaps Motorola in near future.