- cross-posted to:
- android@lemdro.id
- cross-posted to:
- android@lemdro.id
Why was I banned from GrapheneOS? That’s a good question.
 |
|---|
| Why I was banned from GrapheneOS by Daniel Micay) |
Why was I banned from GrapheneOS? That’s a good question.
|
|---|
| Why I was banned from GrapheneOS by Daniel Micay) |
@maltfield Here we go again, another nothing-burger that doesn’t surprise me at all. I love the project, but Daniel just seems insufferable from his comments in that thread, and other, older, comments.
With all respect to him and the project, but if something as simple, as miniscule, very little drama-worthy such as a thread asking for a simple gesture feature causes him to “lose an hour of [his] work” and to make him worry about more attacks on the project, it just indicates bigger problems than just a simple focus loss due to some small issue that gained virtually ZERO interactions besides a total of four people, including Daniel and the community mod.
I get GOS has been harassed by other projects, but even mentioning a ‘competing’ ROM such as /e/OS or CalyxOS counts as bad behaviour and inciting harassment and this and that, it’s obviously not a good look.
He was behaving like that back in the Copperhead days. He stole work he didn’t understand from Spender and publically harassed him to the point where Spender/GRsecurity pulled the plug on their public kernel patches. Huge loss for the Linux community.
deleted by creator
This is a blatant and complete fabrication that you are spreading. The project is on good terms with Spender and you have no evidence to support what you are claiming.
It was after GRsecurity became private that they had an issue with people making upstream security contributions, particularly upstreaming anything from the GRsecurity patches. They had disagreements about that, and then moved past it and are on good terms now.
It’s absolutely ridiculous to claim that Micay has anything to do with them making things private.
https://grsecurity.net/announce https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10126319
It was Wind River, owned by Intel, which was the main offender for upstreaming the patches. Micay was the one who introduced GRsecurity in Arch Linux and did all the integration it had for PaX exceptions and the start of RBAC support (systemd was an issue at the time). It was afterwards once it became private that it was awkward because they didn’t want people upstreaming or maintaining ports of their work but at the time Micay was maintaining GRsecurity in Arch Linux and GrapheneOS (then called CopperheadOS) was using the PaX subset for kernel hardening, so there were existing uses of it to try to keep going in some way.
Thanks for elaborating. Is Spender still nuts?
@maltfield Here’s another example of I’m guessing Daniel, being an asswipe towards someone that had a genuine concern with the ‘apocalyptic’ way GrapheneOS tends to exaggerate their messages. It’s clear from that sentence that “the final version of GrapheneOS” is not intended to be referring to some 24-hour support or whatever they tried to explain later in the thread.
https://mstdn.io/@eskuero/114824540277758406
Notice the loaded words in the thread, “extreme”, “misrepresenting”, “lying”, and so on. That user wasn’t fucking lying or misrepresenting, they were genuinely concerned after reading that stupidly-written message on their Matrix.
There’s a boatload of threads like these where the GOS account jumps to people’s throats with a knife for the smallest things.
Write something that may not be entirely true, perhaps you’ve heard some rumor or whatever somewhere and just want to get official news? Oops, you’re lying, you’re extremely misrepresenting what we wrote, please don’t ever interact with us again, we’ll ban you, etc.
Yeah, I once suggested the camera app from Calyx in their Matrix and I was immediately threatened with a ban
It’s grsec all over again. Quick, someone make a fork and secure funding!
From when I last checked on that topic I couldn’t find much beyond claims by Daniel that other projects had harassed him.