> https://codeberg.org/NerdNextDoor/evi/issues/19

This does not inspire confidence in the maintainers.

No, if this happened to people 2-3 times right after upgrading this wouldn't be something they bring up because the indexing doesn't take months. It's broken. Spotlight used to work almost perfectly since it was introduced and it's been lagging and somewhat defunct since Tahoe.

I wanted to believe in Matrix as well, but after a few years, I basically agree with all these takes:

https://hanez.org/document/why-matrix-sucks/

https://paper.wf/alexia/matrix-is-cooked

https://xn--gckvb8fzb.com/giving-up-on-element-and-matrixorg...

Agreed. Also, the second I found out that their entire UI stack is proprietary I lost all interest in that platform.

Don't the security hardware features of the GrapheneOS phones also rely on proprietary software/firmware?

To my knowledge you have some proprietary firmware blobs, drivers, HAL and the Trusted Execution Environment shipping with GrapheneOS. But replacing Pixel's stock Android with GrapheneOS doesn't expose you to more proprietary components but instead reduces it (by sandboxing Google Play Services for example) and improves upon Android security overall (memory allocation, etc).

So yeah, GrapheneOS isn't 100% OSS, as far as I'm aware. But it doesn't expose me to more proprietary stuff like Jolla would.

You're not wrong, but the main selling point of GrapheneOS in comparison to other options is security, and it relies on proprietary software. So to me it looks a bit similar, although I agree that less blobs is definitely important.

> In 2018, he claimed on Medium that he was fired from PC Magazine because of an article he wrote questioning the safety of 5G.

At least there's a chance he never got the jabs.

Looking good for him: https://dvorak.substack.com/p/the-great-fealty-test?triedRed...

Hope he'll recover quickly.

The amount of compromises leave little to no wiggle room to ever recommend this device to anyone.

Pixel A's are quite affordable. GrapheneOS is open source so if there was a need, people could get it to run on insecure devices that aren't Pixels. Expecting that to be done by GrapheneOS developers who care about security just seems weird.

> Pixel A's are quite affordable

There's first-world, upper-middle-class affordable (~$500) and then there's global affordable (<$250).

I usually buy refurbs similarly like I buy 2 year old cars.

Currently I can get brand new Pixel 8a on ebay for £250 or similar, and refurbs from "flawless" to mint" conditions for half of it.

Still good enough.

I got a Pixel 7 secondhand (but good condition) for the equivalent of about $270. It would have been less but I needed 256 gb of storage.

It's shocking how many developers ans tinkerers still rely on Google when there's Brave, Kagi and others out there.

Reluctant? Guess I'm more of an extremist. I'll rather stop using a service and delete my account than to jump through hoops to get my face scanned. I'm willing to die on this hill.

Isn't this just basically what you get out of the box on GrapheneOS?

Don't underestimate the importance of a user not having to flash an OS. It being preinstalled unlocks a new segment of the market.

Yeah I think the message is really "Motorola will meet the requirements of GrapheneOS in the future".