YHK - yet another hacker news clone

I know it's a matter of taste but omg is this phone not good looking... and that's particularly odd, because pretty much all their other phones are quite OK.

$1,599 MSRP

Well "starting MSRP of $1,599." I'll stick to my 2nd hand Pixel 8 that I bought, for GrapheneOS long term support, for 1/10th of that price.

No doubt it's a way WAY better device, really, but I don't see where I would actually need that. I happily toss the one I have around and don't even care if it gets stolen or lost one day, different preference.

I have a Pixel 10 that I'm looking to install GrapheneOS on, but even at $1599 I'm still intrigued by this. It seems they are trying to build a real long term device with few downsides, which is a big contrast to a lot of Motorola's recent phones.

GrapheneOS promotion is getting weirder and weirder. In the early summer the journalist Richard Medhurst had his running phone snatched by the authorities who allegedly could not get the data due to the GrapheneOS reboot feature.

Medhurst went on Twitter to heavily promote GrapheneOS and was going to write a book about phone security for journalists.

Since August 24 he has disappeared completely. So maybe give us an update here on what really happened or call it DisappearOS in one interpretation or HoneypotOS in the other interpretation. Something is very wrong here.

I don't know if I can trust a motorola phone with grapheneOS. Motorola is owned by a Chinese company that has recently been caught for injecting affiliate codes in users purchases. Yes, I know it won't be Motorola's OS but they do modify a large part of the BSP (bootloader, modem, etc.) with their "mot_sec" additions which you'll find if you reverse engineer any motorola firmware. It's unclear if qualcomm will give grapheneOS permission to rebuild or see the source code everything else. Modern phones run multiple operating systems like in the DSP, modem, trustzone, etc.

Moto Edge series would have been an instant hit with Graphene OS.

I am curious what if any progress has been made with free and open source software and computational photography. I don't have any expertise on this matter. I just remember about five or six years ago the meta was that free and open source apps such as open camera pretty much suck balls when it comes to any advanced photography that allowed the user to click and forget when the likes of the proprietary Google Camera app was where the "magic" happened.