Odd to see Gemini promoted alongside GrapheneOS. One is effectively handing your life to the Google surveillance platform, the other encourages the opposite. What a strange partnership.

EDIT: after reviewing other comments in this thread, I can see how my post here wasn't received well by some. It looks like some people are questioning the trust put into Graphene. I definitely am not. When I said "strange partnership" here, that's not what I meant at all. I think Graphene is operating in a very hostile ecosystem and the more doors Graphene can open for their platform to reach people, the better. The "strange" part of the equation was more aimed at Motorola (and Google) for allowing privacy intrusions to happen and even encouraging it in some ways (Gemini), yet actively supporting a project that would counter it. Maybe I should have used the word "funny" instead of "strange".

▲

grapheneos an hour ago | parent | next [-]

The post is about the overall launch of the device, not only official GrapheneOS support for it. They have their own OS with Google Mobile Services. They've made sure the device will meet all of our requirements and are helping us develop and maintain support for it. It's not the main OS for it.

▲

y-c-o-m-b an hour ago | parent [-]

Please stop spamming this response everywhere. Yes I understand they are just promoting their phone. It doesn't negate what I said in any way.

▲

cromka an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I think it's you who are nitpicking here and somehow you expect the acusee not to defend themselves?

▲

y-c-o-m-b an hour ago | parent [-]

Defend from what? I haven't accused Graphene of anything. In fact I support the platform entirely.

▲

cromka 42 minutes ago | parent [-]

You said it's s strange relationship. That's pretty accusatory. Please don't gaslight us.

▲

y-c-o-m-b 34 minutes ago | parent [-]

Dude I don't know what to tell you. Go look at my post history, I'm not the gaslighting type. I explained my reasoning. Maybe I just have to concede here that I can't articulate my thoughts the way I'm intending to.

	▲	cromka 11 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		GrapheneOS partering with any manufacturer would be just as weird. They cannot have a non-weird partnership at this point because they're a niche product. So whoever is the manufacturer that agrees to work with them, they have to sell that grapheos-friendly phone to ordinary, Googled people as well to actually make money. No manufacturer is a charity here.

▲

HybridStatAnim8 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It does negate what you said. It does not make the partnership strange.

▲

y-c-o-m-b an hour ago | parent [-]

In what way? Please elaborate.

The word strange as defined by the dictionary is "different from what is usual, ordinary, or expected".

You have a large publicly traded corporation advocating using a platform known for large privacy intrusions. This same corporation has partnered with a team that is providing a mechanism for fighting against those privacy intrusions. That is unexpected. I never said it was good or bad, just that it is strange.

EDIT: Here is another data point. Motorola themselves have been sued for breach of privacy:

https://classactionu.org/our-news/motorola-solutions-faces-p...

https://www.classaction.org/news/class-action-lawsuit-claims...

EDIT2: I can't reply to the posts any more, so I'll just finish this discussion off by saying I am merely making an observation. I see people here are getting offended and maybe misunderstanding my intentions. This is not an attack on GrapheneOS, I actually like Graphene and what they are doing. I just find it interesting that the very companies breaching our privacy are the ones that are partnering with Graphene. I did not say this was a bad partnership. The opposite, I actually think it's a very good thing. If I gave the impression this was somehow a jab at Graphene, it's not, I apologize if it came off that way.

▲

sam1714 36 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Motorola Solutions != Motorola Mobility.

Motorola Solutions, the radio and public safety company, was split from the phone company shortly before Google purchased the phones in 2012.

There's no way the largest provider of police radios in the US and EU would be owned by a Chinese company.

▲

y-c-o-m-b 30 minutes ago | parent [-]

Ah I did not know this. Thanks for pointing it out.

	▲	grapheneos 15 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Motorola was split into Motorola Solutions and Motorola Mobility in 2011. Everyone who owned the Motorola stock ended up owning both initially. Motorola Solutions kept the original stock ticker and Motorola Mobility kept ownership of the Motorola trademarks. Motorola Solutions uses the Motorola trademark under a perpetual license only permitting them to use it for the areas they already sold products. Motorola Solutions had more need for the original legal entity due to government contracts and Motorola Mobility had more need for the trademark due to selling retail products. Motorola Mobility was purchased by Google in 2011 and sold to Lenovo in 2014. Motorola Mobility is still based in the US but is well integrated as Lenovo's mobile division. The devices are made by Lenovo with their in-house assembly/manufacturing and external supply chain rather than the typical setup of a western company paying another company to build devices for them. Motorola Mobility sells smartphones and tablets mainly via retail. Motorola Solutions sells cameras, radios and drones mainly via government contracts. They're entirely separate companies with no business partnership. Motorola Mobility can use the Motorola brand for anything but Motorola Solutions would need to pay for a license to use it for new product lines.

▲

HybridStatAnim8 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Having a stock operating system certified by google is usual/ordinary/expected. That is how pixel support worked for many years. This approach is borderline necessary as paying an ODM directly is very expensive and loses out on several benefits.

Motorola stands to make a lot of money from this. They need to improve hardware but they benefit from that hardware. They likely provide early access but they already have that access themselves. From Motorolas perspective, they take on very little risk, if any, to tap into a market that has since been ignored, for existing GrapheneOS users, prospective GrapheneOS users, and for alternative OS users that benefit from yellowboot support. This is the most ordinary approach that could have been taken.

▲

cromka an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> What a strange partnership.

This is the problem. Did you expect grapheneos to somehow convince a major manufacturer to release a flagship phone JUST for grapheneos?

WHAT do you find strange in that relationship? Motorola offered to support some of their phones to be installed with Grapheneos and maybe a dedicated, pre-installed phone sometime down the line. This particular phone is the former.

You're seriously being irrational here. Maybe make your point exactly first because it's hard to tell what is it.

▲

sidm0623 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Do you have a source that Gemini is partnered with GOS? I dont see it anywhere

	▲	y-c-o-m-b an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Apologies, I should have clarified I meant the partnership between GrapheneOS and Motorola.

▲

Ritewut an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's not. Some people have a threat model that includes being okay with AI.

▲

gonzalohm an hour ago | parent | next [-]

What's the overlap for that people with Graphene OS users?

You are going through the trouble of installing a privacy first OS and the first thing you do is handle your data to AI companies? That's pretty odd

	▲	grapheneos an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The post is about the overall launch of the device, not only official GrapheneOS support for it. They have their own OS with Google Mobile Services. They've made sure the device will meet all of our requirements and are helping us develop and maintain support for it. It's not the main OS for it.

▲

y-c-o-m-b an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Being ok with AI is not the same as being ok with Google - one of the most privacy invading companies on the planet - though...

	▲	grapheneos an hour ago \| parent [-]
		The post is about the overall launch of the device, not only official GrapheneOS support for it. They have their own OS with Google Mobile Services. They've made sure the device will meet all of our requirements and are helping us develop and maintain support for it. It's not the main OS for it.

▲

ajjahs an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]