I get your point now. I'm sorry I did not read the article and did not know the full context. I was just reffering the Tuta's answer to you. I admit you properly pointed this article out as being unfair but I believe its just because of a mistake, human error. I think we all can agree that GrapheneOS is currently the most private and secure mobile OS and in comparison to other options from the list it is outstanding in privacy from ANY entity, not just Google. But the truth is, GrapheneOS is not really "deGoogled" OS and that statement is true from Tuta. But paradoxically its the most "degoogled" solution from this list, because you cannot expect any privacy without security first, if other OSes have unimplemented patches it makes them compromised from everyone, from Microsoft to Google, Facebook, CIA and Israel's hackers.
So I hope Tuta either update the article promoting GrapheneOS the most from the other solutions, yet pointing out its still based on Google pixels and Google's OS, or remove the article completely.
nictakiego
npub14z…ypqjd
2026-01-03 13:08:56 GMT
in reply to nevent1q…hg70
Author Public Key
npub14zfchn7wjef7zp6t7jafmec88us6zuwxgc5x9dkxpycw5l92mpys3ypqjdSeen on
wss://relay.momostr.pinkPublished at
2026-01-03 13:08:56 GMTEvent JSON
{
"id": "aebc40bcbb6815bdb8e5bbcf688e1070a3539173e62ab368bc1450207cf891f6",
"pubkey": "a8938bcfce9653e1074bf4ba9de7073f21a171c6462862b6c60930ea7caad849",
"created_at": 1767445736,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ebfa42829912ab15b0c06f9a7773f027a9766b860147733a3f2761161f8cb561",
"",
"reply",
"b3ba3c5045fbaf99be9cb4daa9f1d7baeedaba0fc5b91596511e2fb7a70dd7f9"
],
[
"p",
"a8938bcfce9653e1074bf4ba9de7073f21a171c6462862b6c60930ea7caad849"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://mastodon.com.pl/@nictakiego/115831323780852531",
"web"
],
[
"e",
"31b7eaac331c7cb16f989eb35aa830314d08a42765b1159bc476e92b83d76480",
"",
"root",
"5dbd2206694374f80fbcdc05f8857d0117fe6cd650553b07faf4cbbd1288e5e7"
],
[
"p",
"5dbd2206694374f80fbcdc05f8857d0117fe6cd650553b07faf4cbbd1288e5e7"
],
[
"p",
"bccf7c3f52e9f7bcc2c130da73517a930a7a59e906723fb98a43b36b82f59a2e"
],
[
"p",
"db4ede86ef49a8f24bbed87a25a2ed24e640334422042f3dd7b17797804a4529"
],
[
"p",
"513397d5ba3bc40b64d9741c3e28484507f41d8c63266b28020eee0e39fee781"
],
[
"p",
"b3ba3c5045fbaf99be9cb4daa9f1d7baeedaba0fc5b91596511e2fb7a70dd7f9"
],
[
"proxy",
"https://mastodon.com.pl/users/nictakiego/statuses/115831323780852531",
"activitypub"
],
[
"L",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"l",
"pink.momostr.activitypub:https://mastodon.com.pl/users/nictakiego/statuses/115831323780852531",
"pink.momostr"
],
[
"-"
]
],
"content": "I get your point now. I'm sorry I did not read the article and did not know the full context. I was just reffering the Tuta's answer to you. I admit you properly pointed this article out as being unfair but I believe its just because of a mistake, human error. I think we all can agree that GrapheneOS is currently the most private and secure mobile OS and in comparison to other options from the list it is outstanding in privacy from ANY entity, not just Google. But the truth is, GrapheneOS is not really \"deGoogled\" OS and that statement is true from Tuta. But paradoxically its the most \"degoogled\" solution from this list, because you cannot expect any privacy without security first, if other OSes have unimplemented patches it makes them compromised from everyone, from Microsoft to Google, Facebook, CIA and Israel's hackers.\nSo I hope Tuta either update the article promoting GrapheneOS the most from the other solutions, yet pointing out its still based on Google pixels and Google's OS, or remove the article completely.",
"sig": "fd34d9471e982d98b0e46ca0d8cd1c05b88d88b37bdb931f46828bd42e21625fd48f71ebcb03d6d7e3af5aa6c0db5585b85b8c6fa1042229bc702d302d7c83e5"
}