Agreed. They clearly know their shit and they are stunningly great engineers, but Graphene OS would be much more loved and respected if they had a PR person to take care of online communications.

The "religious zealots" have their own motherfucking Cellebrite column. That means they are right.

They can be abrasive all they want. People who are wrong still need to sit down and listen instead of spitefully "burning bridges".

And that's assuming they're actually guilty of this "abrasiveness" that people accuse them of. I don't actually think that's true. I think their comments are extremely informative and filled to the brim with valuable technical information. I've spent quite some time reading strcat's comments here and it's actually changed my viewpoints on some security matters. For example, I'm no longer as obsessed with knowing what's inside firmware as I used to be, it's better to minimize and isolate such black boxes so they can do no harm. I started valuing IOMMU support and grouping in PC motherboards.

If there's any "abrasiveness" in their posts, it's probably just an undercurrent of frustration with a world that simply refuses to understand or cooperate. A feeling I can't help but have enormous sympathy for.

I am sympathetic to GrapheneOS, but I have also worked with them and they are not easy to work with. Google is in no way required to take on criticism from OSS community- GPL and MIT do not actually require the rights holder to not be an asshole. In such a social dynamic, one will find greater success using language that appeases instead of repels the asshole.

> They can be abrasive all they want. People who are wrong still need to sit down and listen instead of spitefully "burning bridges".

While I wish that were how humans work, it definitely is not. You can make the strongest argument ever and still lose if you deliver it in a way that the listener can't process it because you're triggering emotions. The best arguments IME are factual and respectful.

The best thing about being right is it doesn't matter if the listeners can process it, you're still right.

There are consequences to ignoring GrapheneOS developers. Insecure phones can get people killed.

The best arguments are respectful and measured, but few things in this world are ideal. It's in your best interests to tolerate any perceived "abrasiveness". Ignore the the guys who make Cellebrite sweat at your own peril.

The argument about the seriousness of the topic seems to be to be arguing for taking into account human psychology and toning down rhetoric (note: not failing to make the claims, or dropping points, just changing tone) in order to make it more likely that you get listened to. To the earlier commenters point: it would be great if nothing other than correctness + importance determined likelihood of being listened to. But that's not the way the world works.

Nobody at google will get demoted if vulns in grapheneOS can’t get fixed due to their oss strategy and result in deaths. Yelling at them angrily will not change this. When was the last time someone abrasive called you a moron and corrected you - did you come away feeling like you will take the lesson to heart and adjust your behaviour?