Re:Let's talk about safety of Pinephone
by 0zymandiass on Saturday September 26, 2020 @09:47AM
(#24598820)
If the conversation is
> Software engineering does not put safety first
I'm 100% agreed.
If the conversation is
> The PinePhone has less quality control than Android/iOS
It's patently false
I would parse the article as the second, as it's referring to a specific phone throughout
Re:Let's talk about safety of Pinephone
by Shared404 on Saturday September 26, 2020 @10:26AM
(#24599085)
I read it as the first, with a side of "We need to do this or FL/OSS hardware is going to look bad".
And I concur about the second being patently false. I would guess that it has more overall tbh.
>> The PinePhone has less quality control than Android/iOS
> It's patently false
PinePhone is just HW. Android/iOS is SW. Comparison doesn't make sense. Maybe compare PinePhone to Huawei Honor, or Xiaomi and their HW testing:
Re:Let's talk about safety of Pinephone
by sangnoir on Saturday September 26, 2020 @06:43PM
(#24602756)
> It's patently false
That's a strawman: author never compared to Android/iOS. What they did spell out,is that some of the code they found is unsafe (e.g. commented-out code to prevent false alerts, that was never being reimplemented in a safer way).
Re:Let's talk about safety of Pinephone
by SahAssar on Saturday September 26, 2020 @03:04PM
(#24601292)
But the article does not mention that other phones might have similar challenges. If the article is about the whole industry then say that, if it is specific to the pinephone say that. Currently it's in that weird middle zone where it sounds like it is specific but all the facts would probably be applicable to many phones.
If they use the license wording to help get it across, well, I don't necessarily agree but as they state in the article:
> I'm trying to be a bit inflamatory here, to start the conversation.