I don’t know why this obvious disinformation has a 95% upvote ratio, but it’s a specific fork made by a guy who presumably sells (mainly) to criminals and the police having found a backdoor into that fork. Has nothing to do with any smear campaign against the entire OS.
Check your facts people!
My thoughts exactly. There’s no real article behind that ad.nl link. Then there’s this loosely related link to the GOS mastodon post. And then there’s the broad claim in the title, which, unless OP can provide proper evidence, is entirely made-up bullshit. I use downvotes very sparingly here on Lemmy, but this disinformation piece deserves all the red it gets.
Ad.nl is also a shit source anyway. Tabloid fearmongering.
It sure did look like that from the layout, but I thought it wise to hold back judgement on the source, given that I only had Firefox’ auto-translation, which can be very rough.
Let me just put it this way: the guys in the GrapheneOS thread over on tweakers.nl spent exactly
fourthree comments on it, including one laughing at how bad AD is, after which they proceeded to resume their discussion about their preferred banking app.
Yes, but it should be noted that the disinformation campaign is originating from the government and confusing users to believe all GrapheneOS is bad and being targeted. Agree that the title of the post is misleading, but it’s probably at least in part due to the governmental misinformation.
Where is the government saying that in regard to the raids on these specific pixel phonea?
They’re implying that all GrapheneOS is bad and then saying they’re raiding some people with GrapheneOS phones. How many people understand what GrapheneOS is much less what a fork of it is and how to differentiate the two. It’s designed to be confusing as is most propaganda.
But that is my question: are they really implying that? And if you say so, where can I read that. I’m not making a comment saying
Check your facts people!
And then proceed to not check my facts LOL, so I’m really going to need a source on that claim.
It’s in the OP. I unfortunately don’t have time or energy to make a more detailed summary. You’ll have to read the OP.
Maybe if you had taken a little time or energy to read the comment you replied to, you could have read that I clarified that the OP was now spreading disinformation.
… And now you’re referring me back to the OP?
I did not, but I also didn’t trust any info in the OP, but used all the links to Netherlands based sites. I do know some Dutch, so I was more saying I don’t have time or energy to translate and summarize those linked articles either.
Also, I just realized there were 2 links in the OP. I was digging more into the grapheneos.social link and some of the articles linked there and then down the rabbit hole from there.
And I also now realized my reply might have sounded dismissive, I definitely didn’t intend it that way, but it was early morning when I wrote it and it’s a busy one, so I seriously only meant that to be literal and to say I couldn’t help too much with digging, but everything I read originated from that OP and drilling down into it. Also, my brain tends to ignore the stuff that sounds like trolling or disinformation by default since I just assume everything on the internet is that these days.
There are no “trustworthy” sites for me, so while there was definitely some exaggeration and leading comments in there, I wasn’t really commenting on that, only on the facts of how the Dutch government is seemingly purposely linking all GrapheneOS to this fork, then implying that the fork was meant for pedos, etc., and then further implying that all use of GrapheneOS is for pedos, etc., rather than ordinary privacy.
Most governments have been doing this a lot lately of implying that trying to keep your info private implies you “have something to hide” and then giving some small extreme examples of when that was true and implying everyone who wants privacy is like those extreme examples. There will always be criminals trying to hide things, but that’s not an excuse to go after the ability to maintain privacy.
But yes, always verify, and sorry for the initial abrupt comment and this info-dump comment. It’s just a crazy day and I don’t have time to be a better writer…it’s not really my thing. LOL
Thank you
I’ve never really considered grapheneos. But if this many governments hate it, it’s probably pretty good.
Then as soon as a government approves it, stop using it.
I don’t understand what legal grounds they have to seize the phones. Just installing a different rom shouldn’t be enough.
That depends whether the govt considers if you own your phone or not. In the latter case, they’d see it as breaking the law. Welcome to the renter culture worldwide
Where’s the article? I see a title and 26 comments
Here’s another article https://www.crimesite.nl/grote-politie-actie-tegen-google-pixel-telefoons-reseller-telefoons-in-voorlopige-hechtenis/
Police probably hacked phones bought through a criminal reseller, knew their location, then came to look for those phones. The title is a bit clickbaity, they’re not just coming after regular people.
Resellers, I am fine with criminals being caught by good police work. Flash it yourself and you can trust it.
The thread in question is about smear campaigns, from a brief skim I did not see any mention about them actually seizing Pixel phones? What did I miss?
This campaign is mainly focussed on drugs related crime syndicates, having a graphene phone is seen as criminating evidence. Dutch police has a very competent cybercrime unit, a few years back they cracked a secure “pgp phone” network which exposed multiple drug syndicates and led to a large amount of convictions.
That said, stopping crime is always used as an excuses for states to crack down on privacy and other human rights. Its a slippery slope.
This is just normal reporting. A lot of people think this is state-sponsored but it’s just incompetence. Everybody with deep knowledge about a specific subject knows journalists never report objectively. They always have their readers in mind (what resonates, what do they want to hear) and also have their own biasses. There is a lot of wrong reporting on all media (fake news is not reserved for mainstream media).
