The number of android phones in existence is a good evidence on how much most people are concerned about their privacy (very little).

I disagree.

The number of Android phones in existence is evidence of how important it is to have affordable tech.

Indeed. Second, most people don't actually realise how bad it really is.

How bad it really is?

(assuming you are on Android)

Google's algorithm knows you opened your browser. They almost certainly know what page you opened and how long you have been on it [on chromium, everything typed in URL bar is sent to them]. They probably know that you asked the above question.

If it is a cheap android phone (or even if not, if it uses Rockchip chips, if it is a Xiaomi and likely if it is a Oppo) then at least one Chinese corporation, with ties to a very sophisticated gov apparatus knows it as well.

Considering how many permissions they allow each app to receive (esp. on older versions, which are the majority of users) other apps likely know it as well.

I have a Samsung, and there are lots of clues that they know everything I type and a lot of what I say as well.

Probably other actors as well, since a porous pail will leak...

Good burn, the difference between what permission modals say and what Apple and Google allow you to do with the hardware you paid money for is a valid point in 2022.

I think people are mostly concerned with what they can experience. Building on this, these systems make sure that the breach of privacy is experienced in the least amount possible. When something happens that upsets this surface, like Apple suddenly telling people that an app looked at their clipboard, suddenly privacy is cared about again.

Also, look at other things that are made invisible to the people, and when made visible, people react negatively. Treatment of animals in the various industries, treatment of workers in countries where labour is cheap, issues with waste and its environmental effects.

What’s the alternative? Not run software? Run it all in the browser? FOSS only?

I mean... that's not especially unreasonable; FOSS-first is absolutely a reasonable move, and there's a whole discussion upthread about using the browser version or dialing in with an actual phone. Certainly some people are stuck, but many people can absolutely avoid this.

Not run SW is possibly last resort, or not an alternative at all. But selecting, proposing FOSS alternatives, or run it in the browser if possible are two ways of trying to make the situation better.

As others have said, Jitsi is a for many meetings a good FOSS alternative. And if that does not work, use Zoom in the browser.

Run software from vendors who have demonstrated they are trustworthy -- or, at a minimum, actively AVOID software from vendors (like Zoom) who have repeatedly demonstrated that they are NOT worthy of trust.

No alternative if the people you want to reach, or want to be reached by, are available only on a specific, closed platform.

It's a pick your poison type of situation I think. I personally run FOSS where I can, and compartmentalize the environment where I can't but I still want the benefits.

I guess that’s what I’m getting at. Like this is for work, my company has dictated that we do SSO into the desktop app. I was wondering if there was something I was missing besides the browser version.

But for personal use- totally makes sense

> What’s the alternative?

A desktop operating system that comes with a proper security and permission model (i.e. not a standard Linux system). Right now, QubesOS seems like the only candidate here.

I can't believe Android and iOS are now >=15 years old and Linux is still struggling with this.

IME, a lot of people learn about Wayland's security improvements over Xorg and then immediately consider them deal-breakers. Stuff like global hotkeys and shared clipboard access.

MacOS manages to implement all those things while having sandboxing. Though at the expense of many popups (program X wants to do Y) right now. Maybe not the perfect solution either but it is not an unreasonable thing to ask for IMO.

Which is wild to me because my immediate thought upon learning was ok, how long until I can get off Xorg?

Fedora 35 came with Wayland by default, it was so smooth I haven't even noticed :) I only learned about it when I reflexively invoked an x-something tool and it said command not found.

For any service I want to use that has a website, I absolutely use that instead of the app.

I can close it and know it is closed.

Unless PWA fans have their way and succeed perverting browsers into an app platforms, that is.

Hey it's better than electron.

GNU/Linux phones (Librem 5 and Pinephone), but they aren't polished yet.

I would argue this is the exact opposite of what we want to do.

The primary cause of this problem is the conventional desktop OS which has no meaningful security model.

IOS and Android have the correct approach to mitigate this, strong sandboxing and mandatory access control.

GNU/Linux phones bring these problems to mobile, which considering how much of our lives are on these devices, is an absolute disaster.

Here you go: https://qubes-os.org

So I actually use this as my daily driver, but I think it illustrates the point quite well.

The only way to meaningfully secure a GNU/Linux desktop is to run multiple instances of it through a type-1 hypervisor.

For a mobile device, a user prioritizing privacy, security and FOSS would be much better served by GrapheneOS.

Brave talk seems browser based.

The real problem is not that we have to run the software, it is that we run it on devices that usually store a huge fraction of our personal life, and which we rely on every day to run our lives.