Thank you for that more balanced correction. Calyx stops tracking in more than one way. It does not come with Google Login requirements and an=y apps that require it. For the few that provide lesser means of tracking it spoofs identity so the info is useless to track anyone. FWIW Calyx is apparently and substantially more private than Lineage but not s private by default as Grephene,

No. I do not use the Google App Store, Google Maps, Google Play or anything of which I'm aware allows wifi triangulation or any specific identity.
Presently, I'm not yet even using a SIM card and I won';t until I learn more about cost/benefit.

I ask that to try to determine any ulterior motivation that would slant your views on Google that ever might result in a characterization like "rape". I am basically a Capitalist, but recognize that all systems evolve, and what may have started as more or less "laissez faire" tends to drift toward fascism over time as wealth is power and successfully wealthy corporations try to gain "insulation" from competition by "cozying up" to government, so that natural drift requires some means of thwarting, preventing, and/or correcting such drift in order for Capitalism to maintain it's general benefits for all, not just a few.

I view Socialism as an institution that more or less establishes some organization, usually under government auspices, to legislate the redistrubution of wealth based on Need rather than Contribution. In general, it seems that socialists by default denigrate the wealthy regardless of how they attained wealth. Google being unimaginable wealthy no doubt is nearly demonic in most Socialist's eyes. So I want to know if this is anything like your position... a grain of salt, as it were.

It appears we agree that, to borrow a cliche, "With great power comes great responsibility" and if any organization "forgets" this they shoppuld indeed "be reminded" and where it counts most to them, in their finances.


Thanks! I will check that out.

EDIT - BTW and possibly most importantly I can and have gotten by without a smartphone until very recently. My number 1 motivation for bothering with them is the ever increasing requirement of 2nd Party Authorization which most often requires a text message to a mobile phone device.

My previous phone was a flip-phone that has been obsoleted and is now junk parts so I'm exploring the most secure and private means by which I can comply with the understandable and valuable 2nd Party Authorization services without also taking undo risks. I have been following PinePhone for a couple years now and it is my understanding SMS is not perfected yet and the hardware is... well... minimal at best. I'm researching several ways around that problem but ideally, as it becomes reliably functional, I will be using Linux on whatever device works best for me.

I gathered that.
Yet you suddenly have a lot to say about some "privacy focused" "alternative" Android ROM.
Read that article, hopefully you will understand what AOSP is and why it also contains calls to Google servers and (possibly) why almost nobody bothers to take them out.
The main developer of GrapheneOS (Daniel Micay iirc) has things to say about that, you can watch him spitting bile & ranting on reddit.
And it's not only about that ("privacy") but also about serving the Googleverse in general.
Just like choosing Linux over $PROPRIETARY_OS I made my choice for smartphones, too. It's a philosophy I guess. User-centricity. The software is on my side.

I don't get it ondoho. I have co-responded with you by answering the same question I've asked of you (that you still avoid). I think I've been gracious and gentlemanly with you despite your somewhat and sometimes confrontational manner, yet you continually condescend and attack my position but never the actual data, just generalizations. You say generally negative things and keep referring to AOSP but never comment on spoofed identity or not using any tracking google services, etc etc etc. I mean is avoiding wifi triangulation pro privacy and pro security or not? Why comment on my relative newness to the area and not the assertions? I'm an avid reader and tend to research obsessively and I'm a fast study and I am not even close to being new to computing or networking having networked computers since 1992.

At least, in your defense, you've admitted that "something is better than nothing" but how about contributing to the knowledge of Linux - Mobile?... by stating precisely why and how Android is irretrievably evil and no amount of care will protect one's privacy? Negative generalizations are just FUD as far as I'm concerned. Let's see some of your accumulated wisdom please instead of just "when you understand AOSP better, we can talk". That's arrogant AF.

OK, first of all, you're right in one thing:
Something is definitely better than nothing.
I have always said that wrt online privacy and never claimed otherwise.
I meant to mention this again in my previous post but simply forgot, eager to press the Reply button.

Not sure what you're refering to here. Your question whether I'm a socialist?
I'm not going to answer that, sorry.
Also, answering a question you yourself have asked is not "co-responding".

That is open to debate. I think the very phrasing of the sentence, where you pose a comparison in which you yourself come out on top (or at least that's what you're telling yourself) is somewhat less than gentlemanly.
And you're doing similar things all the time.

This simply isn't true - firstly I don't attack ("condescend" is harder to grasp - you're not wrong there, since I'm telling you things from a relatively higher position - but I believe you're mind is blowing it up to be something agressive, which it is not), secondly there's no actual data coming from you, just generalisations (I guess you're repeating sales talk you read on CalyxOS website).
And just to be clear: I never said CalyxOS is bad or anything. Something is better than nothing.
But the claim of "de-googling" an Android-based OS

1. requires technical proof
2. and more importantly, is impossible when taken literally. Unless one clarifies that one refers to calls to Google servers only, in which case 1. applies.

No, I don't. Unless you want to claim that saying "No , I don't" is generally negative. Which would be logically correct I guess.

All these things are good, no doubt about it, but might turn out to be less spectacular than CalyxOS' sales pitch suggests.
For example this suggests that all the latter might mean is opting out of it through a config option. It doesn't mean that it becomes impossible to triangulate your phone, be it by Wifi or other means. I'm not saying it is so, but this requires the technical explanation, the How. And the burden proof is not on me, sorry.

About AOSP, I think I have stated often enough that it's important to understand that all so-called "alternative" or "privacy focused" ROMs are based on it and what that entails.

Because the assertions are just that, without the data, and your relative newness apparently misleads you to take CalyxOS' (?I guess?) assertions at face value.

Good. I'm sure you'll see my point once you do that.

Once again, I never stated that Android is all that, once again, you are putting words in my mouth. Please stop.

Anyhow, it's a huge topic. Please read the article (3 pages iirc).
Also feel free to review my previous contributions to the Linux Mobile section of LQ.
It might be new to you, but we've been having discussions here for years.

There's something we can agree on.

Wow, I made you swear even if it's just an abbreviation!
Anyhow, once again, I never said that. Please stop misquoting me.
I said: "show me proof that CalyxOS (...) have taken all calls to google servers out of AOSP or any part of their code base, we'll talk about de-googled."
And no, I don't feel like going through their source code (if it's even accessible).
BTW, if they did, I guess they would advertise it.

Once again: I'm not saying you made a bad choice there, and never said so before.
I just dislike absolute statements like "de-googled" which obviously cannot be true.

No, asking an off-topic personal question that you have no real right to ask and then insisting upon an answer is rude and arrogant. Please correct yourself.

1 members found this post helpful.

With respect wpeckham, I don't view my question as off topic and I not only explained why but offered my answer as well. It seems totally on topic to attempt to understand from what POV a responder is writing. For example I very much dislike Windows and distrust Microsoft so it would seem valid following a rant of mine against either if another member asked me a similar question to try to determine if I am biased or carry some sort of "chip on my shoulder" regarding the company rather than a feature of their software.

As for "rude and arrogant", given my POV outlined above, I simply disagree. You certainly have a right to your views and opinions but expecting others to abide by your interpretation could easily also be considered rude and arrogant. Please note that while I truly don't hold that against you, I also will not stoop to the backhanded deception of saying "Sorry you feel that way". My question was not meant to be offensive so I won't apologize for it nor withdraw the question. If, as it seems, ondoho continues to choose not to answer that is his prerogative as well. It was a request, not a command, and certainly no manner of baiting. I simply want to understand to whom I'm corresponding.

On a technical thread you asked a political question, and when the other member declined to answer that question insisted, and you do not consider that rude or off-topic.
What is your criteria for rude?
What is your criteria for off-topic?
I ask because they clearly differ from mine and I want to understand.

1 members found this post helpful.

OK wpekham I will take you at your word and try to explain while also trying to be brief. I grew up at a time when Chevy vs Ford was something like identity politics is today. I don't dubscribe to identity politics but I am aware of preconceived notions and agenda-driven opinion. If I'd asked a group back in the 60s, "I'm considering buying a Ford Pinto and want to know if anyone has any input on whether that's a good choice or not... anyone?" and someone responded saying "It's a Ford. It's trash. Buy a Chevette" that wouldn't be very helpful since they might just be on "Team Chevy". I might ask them if they come from a family of Chevy owners, and I would view that as contentious, let alone rude.

The entire situation could have been avoided had the respondent said something like "I prefer Chevy but admittedly some Fords, like the Mustang are pretty decent but the Pinto is basically an explosion waiting to happen. Check out these statistics on Pinto accidents at Consumers reports <link>.

Does that scenario explain my position any better? I sincerely hope so as I'm aware that intent is a large part of whether a negative comment is "constructive criticism" or just nasty. I don't know how I can convince anyone my intent was merely understanding lacking what I view as pertinent metrics, but I assure you I have no hidden agenda. I just want to learn what I can do to find a decent balance between function, privacy and security. Generally very few things are so simple as to be all good or all bad.

If this is supposed to portray the discussion we had here, you're wrong on all points. I already pointed out your errors and misconceptions, I won't do it again.

It seems something I said personally ticked you off, and now you're trying to construct a logical explanation around that so you can continue feeling superior.

We've been here before, we'll be here again, but I won't make a hobby out of it.

#1 you spelled my name incorrectly.
#2 I cannot view google as a ford. This is more like "I am interested in your opinion of ford so tell me if you are a vegetarian" kind of connection.

Thank you for the explanation, but I still do not understand you. As it is all off-topic, let us let it rest at that.

I have not been "ticked off" if by that you mean "angry". I was legitimately confused, that's all. There is no continuation of "feeling superior" on my part since I am aware and have said so in some threads, and again here and now, that it appears you have substantially more experience than I in Mobile Linux.

It is important to me to learn how to make my smartphone experience a balance I can be comfortable with between security/privacy and convenience/function. I'd still like to know how identity spoofing, not using google's tracking apps, etc. fail to do what they they supposedly accomplish and if that is so I want to know it and how to improve it, not foolishly stroke my ego. I truly don't understand why or how this became even slightly adversarial. I'd truly rather it not and partly because I think I can learn from you if you'd just explain a few of those basics and not just assert they don't work. Sorry but that's just too nebulous for my newbishness in this area. If explaining those basics is too lengthy to manage on a message board, how about a link to a site that explains how Google can sidestep things like identity spoofing, if that is the case.

I very much dislike having to risk being viewed as "making excuses" but since I have offended you I will explain. My left side is quite damaged from a stroke and my left hand does not follow my direction like it used to. It will commonly spasm and create an abundance of typos. I do try to proofread and correct them and I failed to see the mistake I made with your name. You have my sincere apology.

Explanations, especially with analogies, only work where there is common ground. Apparently that wasn't the case with Ford vs/ Chevy in explaining how bias awareness affects perception of opinionated information so I will be blunt.

Some people hate anything, for example, that Microsoft engages in, and I'm not very far from that with Microsoft and i am willing and able to explain why I harbor that bias, the track record I both read about and personally experienced that led me there. Some people simply hate anything Big, like Big Business and socialists are among those commonly. I don't think my question in my own thread was off topic because I wanted some clarity on the nature of ondfoho's bias, if any exists. As it is I still am not sure if one does exist and it is now blown way out of proportion and maybe I should've realized that in 2022, Identity Politics abounds and that it had to be interpreted as it was, but I'm old school and not inclined to sum people up just because of politics.

If that doesn't make any sense to you, I give up, since I created this thread to learn something through conversation about mobile phone experiences, not mundanr politics.

Hello MrBlueBudo

You might find this video helpful since this man seems to know a lot about mobile security and in this one he mentions that Ubuntu Touch works well on a Nexus 7. Hder also compares it and Librem5 or Pinephone to De-Googled phones. I don't know yet how accurate he is regarding De-Googled privacy, but there dies seem to be some consensus with most similar content creators and since these ROMs are OpenSource, that seems to be likely to be fairly objective. FWIW this does address the power constraints currently affecting all Linux phones. Naturally Linux phones are about 5 years behind. We can choose if that matters to us in our use case.

Here it is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EawS7CAUrf8

Wow.
I was going to answer your technical questions one more time, but then I realised how phony and duplicitous this statement is, given the very recent conversation right above it, and now I'm not going to out of sheer spite.

Suit yourself ondoho. I harbor no ill toward you even still will but I surely won't miss your posting here since we apparently don't understand each other at all. Duplicitous and phony? Please. You don't know me at all and it speaks volumes about jumping to what appears to be agenda-driven conclusions with little evidence or experience. It actually amazes me that anyone with even a years worth of internet experience can remain ignorant of the difficulty in knowing someone from raw text only, especially considering cultural language differences.