My proposition is to make a softer option for the duress pin (possibly with some kind of warning in the corresponding settings menu that using it as a bypass for border checks will cause troubles). Could be called a "robber pin".
For instance, it could clear data of specific applications, remove specific files, etc., maybe remove a specific eSIM, and leave no visual traces that this option was ever configured. And keep working as normally, without making it look too suspicious.
This should be useful in case it's clear that the attacker has no access to the analysis tools, which could prove what exactly was removed.
GOS devs responses appear to be solely limited to those who are at risk of being checked with these tools. I think this doesn't make sense: you don't need any tools to know that the phone was just fully wiped, 'cause it kinda screams in the face with this fact currently:
https://www.androidauthority.com/grapheneos-duress-pin-us-prosecution-3691271/
I don't say that they've implemented something useless, though. It's useful for journalists in particular, who may be transporting some raw secret materials, just as one example.
> quiet a rare case
The meme I posted is an expression of my frustration with GOS devs ignorance of dozens of repetitive criticisms made by others, long before me.
GOS doesn't seem to respond to this particular kind of criticism on Nostr. They, however, at least used to respond on the platforms, where they in practice may threaten a critic with a ban (last paragraph):
https://discuss.grapheneos.org/d/17241-duress-pin-limited-usefulness/18
The thing I learned from all this, with the help of alp (npub175n…g6w0) in a completely unrelated discussion, is that this kind of criticism should never ever be mixed with the "social normality" kind of argumentation (including UX-related).
#grapheneos
The "convenience" context:
quoting> Catering to the dumbest of the dumb is a straw man argument
nevent1q…s4fu
This teaches me something about argumentation; thanks for your wisdom.
I definitely don't support many things normies consider socially normal/acceptable when it comes to security and sovereignty in particular (the Google-based login is included, I don't support it), though I might use normality as an argument occasionally. Time to drop this habit.
Yet I don't support the idea that normies don't deserve censorship-resistant and zero-trust technologies either—Nostr in particular. At some point all this will become a normality (hopefully in some healthy way, not by pasting raw nsec on random pages or something), and I think it's great. Limiting this (to some kind of "smart enough" people) feels to me like saying normies don't deserve the internet at all, that they should be somehow separate from it. I might talk about it on my video channel in the future; looks like this paradox of "equal rights for everyone except" is so deep; I can't properly articulate it in messages right now.
I'm not currently convinced that Nostr is risking becoming another Twitter. I think that some kind of natural segregation will happen anyway, but this will take place in the network. Feed algorithms perhaps will take place in such segregation. Many of us will ignore these algorithms and will keep building connections in a more natural way. Some of us will build private invite-only communities, etc.