If they replaced the core of the OS with a rootkit, it wouldn't be GrapheneOS anymore but rather a derivative of it. They didn't do that and people should be clear if they have rather than calling it GrapheneOS.
Every power source has trade offs, bud. They call solar renewable, but in fact panels have a shelf life, and take valuable finite resources and energy to manufacture. This is what climate change activists like to ignore /s
Its very easy to source switches, soldering kit and skill curve for this particular repair is short. Plus you can even end up with better performing mouse switches
Calling the American Revolution terrorism, in the modern sense, is a stretch. It was a war waged primarily between soldiers and materiel with the goal of ending the enemy's ability to wage war.
Systematic use of terror as a policy to induce fear in the general public to push them to coerce their government's policy was not widely used.
I’m pretty patriotic but even I can recognize some parallels. There are examples of targeting civilians (tarring and feathering loyalists, or destroying their property). If you consider the attacks against Tesla to be terrorism [1] then the Boston Tea Party would probably fit that bill as well. I’d probably consider it irregular warfare, but I wouldn’t call it a stretch for someone to disagree.
This is massively disingenuous. If you showed up in public in the US today with a bunch of men in uniform and announced your intention of using military force to secure some perceived political rights, you'd be denounced as a terrorist by the authorities while you were still reading out your carefully drafted rules of engagement.
Likewise, the proponent of a huge data center project in Utah and the Secretary of the Interior are both arguing that opposition to data centers is the result of Chinese communist propaganda: https://fortune.com/2026/06/10/kevin-oleary-trump-administra...
As far as I'm aware there have been zero acts of violence related to data center construction, or even threats of same.
I will be happy to steer you to work by philosophers and legal researchers on the construction of 'terrorism' as a political concept and the difficulty of cleanly differentiating it from 'legitimate' forms of violent political action.
The french revolution was terrible and made every single person in france worse off. It is the exact evidence that shows that even in a revolution restraint is still needed.
If a government does not respond to the wishes of its people, violence is an inevitability. It is in the best interest of the state to be accommodating enough to placate the citizens.
Only if what those people want is something I agree with otherwise I think the state holds the monopoly on violence and we need to mobilize it against the wrong thinker.
Huh. You read that as whataboutism. I just saw "this is also bad, let's list the offenders". Not an excuse or normalization, but an expansion of scope. It may not be terribly useful or relevant in this instance, but I tend to lean towards wholistic examination of issues, which must include all the places and forms where they appear.
Then again, maybe I'm just bad at recognizing intent from such small pieces of writing.
To add my voice to the choir: fuck all the governments pushing this nonsense. It causes harm with no measurable, justifiable benefit.
reply