Only if it has one those sick Doom album covers.

I used a hardened version of Fennec, but have switched to Iron Fox, through the Accrescent store. Both are privacy-centric Firefox forks for Android. I think they’re your best bet.

Look, I’d love for Peertube to rival Youtube (and it’s a growing platform, who knows what will happen in the future), but like you said, there are very few content creators and mainstream personalities there. Try looking up a song, a clip from a popular TV show, a game walkthrough, a stand up from your favorite comedian, a silly meme, whatever, and if you find anything on Peertube, that’s impressive, but on Youtube you’ll have dozens upon dozens of examples. The difference in scale over popular content makes any usability comparison right now just wishful thinking. This has been by far YT’s (and maybe on a larger scale Google’s) strength: everything/everyone is already there, so why go anywhere else, where not nearly the amount of people will be watching and bringing in money based on those views.

Still, I’m hopeful people will accept alternative platforms more and more, with how shitty the YT experience has been on the official client and I enjoy discovering new channels I can follow on Peertube, but as of now, I don’t think most people could ditch one for the other, realistically.

There’s simply not even close to the amount of content amassed on YT, and on Peertube’s case (and perhaps on the Fediverse itself), having to navigate through instances makes onboarding not as seamless as the alternative. On the other hand, I think YT’s monetization scheme makes it a more attractive platform at the moment, which further contributes to the extent of its user base.

Wish we weren’t stuck with YT, but Peertube and others are not nearly anp viable option yet. Hurray for other clients, though.

Ah, should have clarified, you can make it with or without the chicken (which I usually do) and it’ll still be great.

I’ve got a few delicious veggie dishes that make the rounds on my house, check them out and give one or two a try:

Creamy Cherry Tomato and Squash pasta

French Lasagna (sorry for the FB link)

Pennoni with Caramelized Pear and Cavolo Nero

Portobello Risotto

Grilled Nectarine Caprese Salad (great for summer)

Black Bean and Corn Salad (hella versatile, I like to make this with Dijon vinaigrette)

Shakshuka

Sweet and Spicy Stewed Chickpeas

Sweet Potato Casserole with Pecan Topping

Vegan Chickpea Picatta Sauce pasta

West African Peanut Soup

It’s also up to us to not jump aboard any given claim and be critical of what others are spelling out for us. In any case, the transcripts in both english and french were posted by grapheneOS in the comments as well, so non-native french speakers can draw their own conclusions.

You’re right that it’s also up to him to clarify his remarks, but I feel like this is a non-issue generously stretched out online that just sows further division that only benefits the big offenders against privacy.

Agree with your outlook, but I think it’s not too farfetched to give the benefit of the doubt to the speaker here and establish that pedophiles were used as an example (of people whose survival depends on their data not being breached), rather than a direct comparison. And he goes on to name being an executive to the secret services as another example (again, of people to whom hardened security of data is an imperative), but we’re not saying he thinks secure phones are just for people in secret services, are we?

He’s just saying, albeit rather clumsily, that their goal is simply not that level of hardened security, but rather privacy from data miners.

I don’t think he’s actually making the parallelism with pedophiles and security per se, but rather he’s making the case that his OS’ mission isn’t by default focused on that level of security or anonymity, but rather privacy and disengagement from companies who profit from your data being mined.

He mentioned pedophiles, as well as the secret service, right after, as examples of either criminals who need to be obscured from detection (maybe because it’s easy for the Epstein class to pop in someone’s head, nowadays?) or government agents that need to protect themselves from data breaches, and said his type of OS isn’t made with that level of airtight security in mind, which is understandable and reasonable, and something we probably all knew already. It could’ve just as well been terrorists and investigative journalists mentioned.

One could take his stance and engage in discussion on whether we need that level of security by default as ordinary citizens, or that even without exceptional circumstances, it becomes necessary in an increasingly hypervigilant society/government, but that’s a separate discussion.

We should have a little nuance in interpreting speeches like these rather than taking things this literally, especially when it’s coming from a direct competitor in the degoogling sphere, who would naturally gain from holding it up in the most unflattering light.