@sir @kev just because desktop linux is slacking behind on securiry advancements doesn't mean its a smart idea to recommend to end users to pay 800$ for a device which is significantly less secure the mature platforms. If the librem five was clearly marked to be experimental and should be used with caution, i would be fine with it, but currently thats not the case.
Thats kinda weird logic.
Remember security should be done in depth, if the trust in the maintainers fails, you still have trust in the isolation. Also what about folks who want/need software outside of the default repo's? Dont they deserve protection?
@blacklight447 @kev this is that dumb securitybro absolutism I was referring to. "Better security", at any costs. Everything is a tradeoff, and security does not have an infinite weight on that metaphorical scale.
Folks who want software outside of the default repos have the wrong want. It's like wanting to eat burnt tires.
@sir @kev but if your not expected to run the stock os: 1. Why do they even develope it in this case?
2. Then it shouldn't be marketed as something normal end users could/should use, but only tech savvy folks with 800$ to burn.
P.s. the librem 5 is still full of binary blobs, so its not even nearly "truly open"
@sir @kev thats okay, my opinion on the matter is: if you are a tinkerer who likes messing around with your device, then the librem 5 is just for you, but its just not ready for normal end users to adopt, i would say having default disk encryption enabled is a fair minimum requirement for mobile devices.
@sir @kev i would say thats less unlikely then you think, android has had default encryption since (i think?) Android 5, ios has had it for ages as well. Laptops are more problematic, but atleast mac os and linux have out of the box support(not turned on, but support). Regarding windows, MS need to get their ass of the enterprise throne and allow windoes home users to utilize bitlocker