> <@pikey:matrix.org> is graphene "owned by facebook"? If you don't like my choice, that's fine. I don';t think I am the only person who would avoid using things owned by silicon valley platforms given the state of privacy in the world (and where it continues to head). plus I am the first to admit that my lack of technical knowledge means I have to sometimes take philosophical decisions in lieu of technical ones as they are often beyond me to make accurately. It's just a personal choice. Not sure why my choices have no place here, and I also don't see any ad hominems. I am not attacking anyone. I merely commented that I avoid things which are produced by the likes of famously invasive companies. I remember once asking whether Skype is secure to use, I assumed it must be since they started advertising "encrypted chats". Someone whispered to me "but do they have the decryption keys?". And with that I realised my lack of knowlege and best to just take things more on trust than tech details as I can make a trust judgement way easier than I can make a technical one. Hence, I avoid Skype. I avoid Facebook. I avoid WhatsAPp because it's owned by Facebook. It may be PERFECTLY safe to use, I don't claim it isn't. I just claim I feel safer staying away. > > Pixel is a good example of an exception I would and do make, but only because those I choose to trust (such as Jolly Roger, Daniel Micay...) explained why the device is safe even though it is made by Google, as the OS takes care of any 'googleness' which was in the device from factory. It's a choice, no offence intended to anyone and no attack on anyway, except perhaps my own admitted ignorance to specifics of technology. Should it be mentioned that Google creates android?