The_HatedOne

266 posts

The_HatedOne banner
The_HatedOne

The_HatedOne

@The_HatedOne_

Because mass surveillance is a backdoor into freedom of speech.

Katılım Kasım 2016
40 Takip Edilen6.5K Takipçiler
Urban Hacker
Urban Hacker@realUrbanHacker·
Remember that your favorite privacy influencers blocked me after I asked some questions. This is why @WatchmanPrivacy has NO SPONSORS
Urban Hacker tweet media
English
5
0
6
288
The_HatedOne
The_HatedOne@The_HatedOne_·
Daniel Micay from @GrapheneOS has done more for privacy and security than all of his critics combined. You may not like his personality but I have yet to see a single refutation of Micay's work on the merit of security. Those that ignore this distinction are frauds.
GrapheneOS@GrapheneOS

WIRED (@WIRED) has gone ahead with publishing an extraordinarily inaccurate article about GrapheneOS. It presents a highly inaccurate history of the GrapheneOS project heavily based on fabrications from James Donaldson. WIRED failed to incorporate most of our responses to his inaccurate claims. Donaldson has fabricated a whole alternate history of the project and Copperhead including leaving out the fact that it had 3 co-founders rather than 2. Donaldson lived off income brought in by Daniel's open source project created prior to the company. He certainly didn't fund it as he claims. Prior to publishing the article, a fact checker at WIRED asked us a long series of questions about the project. These questions made it extremely clear that the article was largely sourced from fabrications from Donaldson despite it not being specified. It's not a real history of GrapheneOS at all. Our community manager spring-onion (Dave Wilson) handled nearly all of the communications with WIRED. He's a public-facing member of our moderation team and well known in our community. WIRED first reached out to Daniel, promised the story wouldn't be about him and were handed off to spring-onion. WIRED heavily misled about the article. They led us to believe the article would be about GrapheneOS with little coverage of the history. They repeatedly reassured us it would hardly have any of the content it ended up being based around. Therefore, we had no opportunity to properly address it. We made a forum post at discuss.grapheneos.org/d/34369-origin… which contains an overview of the situation along with the unmodified answers we provided to WIRED's fact checker. You can see for yourself what we provided and that it wasn't anywhere close to adequately incorporated into the article. After the article was submitted, we received that list of questions from WIRED's fact checker. We realized the article was largely going to be a fake account of the history of the project based on Donaldson's claim. That's when we made these posts: x.com/GrapheneOS/sta… bsky.app/profile/graphe… A small portion of our response to those questions was incorporated, but not most of it. There's also more we weren't asked about which we can now see is in the article. We tried to address that at in the initial overview at discuss.grapheneos.org/d/34369-origin… prior to the submitted answers.

English
1
2
17
699
The_HatedOne
The_HatedOne@The_HatedOne_·
@benjo7635 My focus would still be on Tor first, then Nym, Mullvad, IVPN and Proton.
English
0
0
0
209
The_HatedOne retweetledi
vp.net
vp.net@vpnet_official·
🔴 LIVE TOMORROW — 4PM ET The Hated One @The_HatedOne_ joins Hide & Speak to talk about the surveillance state, tech monopolies, and what it actually takes to reclaim your digital freedom. Is true anonymity still possible? We're asking the hard questions. Link in comments 👇
vp.net tweet media
English
1
1
7
448
The_HatedOne retweetledi
THE SBNWO
THE SBNWO@amazingatheist·
Ben Affleck has a nuanced take on AI.
English
8
11
72
5.6K
The_HatedOne
The_HatedOne@The_HatedOne_·
@all_secured You didn't offend me. I criticize your business decision to take sponsors that conflict with your privacy videos, not your personality. I use and like Proton but I also don't take their money. If you think I am wrong, please convince me because I'd love to take Proton's $70 CPA.
English
0
0
5
127
Josh | All Things Secured
Josh | All Things Secured@all_secured·
So it seems @The_HatedOne_ had a falling out with Proton, which is unfortunate, but for some reason has decided that because I use and like them, I'm somehow a sellout. Not sure what I did to offend him. The privacy community can be equal parts encouraging as well as divided.
English
5
0
12
924
The_HatedOne
The_HatedOne@The_HatedOne_·
@_Matrix_666_ @all_secured @ProtonPrivacy is not a shady company. They are founded and run by good people. But their ecosystem is too big, and it doesn't make sense to have your VPN and your emails under the same company.
English
0
0
1
69
Quintessence
Quintessence@_Matrix_666_·
@all_secured @The_HatedOne_ Proton is & always has been a shady company. They are nothing more than a privacy washing operation. The harder you look, the shadier they get.
English
1
0
0
137
The_HatedOne
The_HatedOne@The_HatedOne_·
@all_secured @DisquiseMe I criticize your conflict of interests with your sponsors and your reflex is to do an ad hominem? I'd appreciate you could show me how I am wrong. I'll start taking sponsors if I am wrong. Are you willing to have your mind changed too?
English
0
0
0
45
Josh | All Things Secured
Josh | All Things Secured@all_secured·
@DisquiseMe @The_HatedOne_ I totally agree with this. You're right. The fact that we're serving two different audiences means that one side demonizing the other or claiming some moral high ground (which I'd argue doesn't exist in this case) feels childish and petty.
English
1
0
0
72
The_HatedOne
The_HatedOne@The_HatedOne_·
@GrapheneOS You should write an official response letter to Le Parisien and request them to publish it in their next issue. This is ass journalism and shouldn't be accepted by any serious outlet. Editors should issues corrections and reprint them.
English
1
0
9
408
GrapheneOS
GrapheneOS@GrapheneOS·
We were contacted by a journalist at Le Parisien newspaper with this prompt: > I am preparing an article on the use of your secure personal data phone solution by drug traffickers and other criminals. Have you ever been contacted by the police? Are you aware that some of your clients might be criminals? And how does the company manage this issue? Absolutely no further details were provided about what was being claimed, who was making it or the basis for those being made about it. We could only provide a very generic response to this. Our response was heavily cut down and the references to human rights organizations, large tech companies and others using GrapheneOS weren't included. Our response was in English was translated by them: "we have no clients or customers" was turned into "nous n’avons ni clients ni usagers", etc... GrapheneOS is a freely available open source privacy project. It's obtained from our website, not shady dealers in dark alleys and the "dark web". It doesn't have a marketing budget and we certainly aren't promoting it through unlisted YouTube channels and the other nonsense that's being claimed. GrapheneOS has no such thing as the fake Snapchat feature that's described. What they're describing appears to be forks of GrapheneOS by shady companies infringing on our trademark. Those products may not even be truly based on GrapheneOS, similar to how ANOM used parts of it to pass it off as such. France is an increasingly authoritarian country on the brink of it getting far worse. They're already very strong supporters of EU Chat Control. Their fascist law enforcement is clearly ahead of the game pushing outrageous false claims about open source privacy projects. None of it is substantiated. iodéOS and /e/OS are based in France. iodéOS and /e/OS make devices dramatically more vulnerable while misleading users about privacy and security. These fake privacy products serve the interest of authoritarians rather than protecting people. /e/OS receives millions of euros in government funding. Those lag many months to years behind on providing standard Android privacy and security patches. They heavily encourage users to use devices without working disk encryption and important security protections. Their users have their data up for grabs by apps, services and governments who want it. There's a reason they're going after a legitimate privacy and security project developed outside of their jurisdiction rather than 2 companies based in France within their reach profiting from selling 'privacy' products. discuss.grapheneos.org/d/24134-device… Here's that article: archive.is/AhMsj
English
167
1K
4.5K
664.6K