This is why people should buy a cheap phone with stock android on which zero private data is stored and that is never used for anything other than those verification things or government apps that might be or become mandatory.
What i mean is, use your graphene phone for everything, but don't use it to legitimate yourself.
Take an old phone or cheap one and put nothing on it, no contacts, no email (maybe one exclusively used for this phone without any private conversation on it), no apps like messengers and so on.
A phone that is only used like a passport, to legitimate yourself and or use government apps you are forced to use."
HN commenters consistently argue they, and therefore everyone else, must be able to use the same phone for everything
Otherwise corporate mobile OS alternatives like GrapheneOS are useless
For example if banking app, the proverbial example, requires some corporate mobile OS, then the owner must use this corporate mobile OS for everything else besides banking, too
If they have multiple phones, then presumably they must also use the corporate mobile OS on every one of them
No exceptions
Perhaps next we will see comments trying to argue that users can only have one phone
Or that the only computer user may own is a phone
These HN comments make little sense to me
Perhaps the people using multiple as phones mentioned in MineralWater's comment are not the people commenting on HN
"MineralWater
This is why people should buy a cheap phone with stock android on which zero private data is stored and that is never used for anything other than those verification things or government apps that might be or become mandatory.
What i mean is, use your graphene phone for everything, but don't use it to legitimate yourself.
Take an old phone or cheap one and put nothing on it, no contacts, no email (maybe one exclusively used for this phone without any private conversation on it), no apps like messengers and so on.
A phone that is only used like a passport, to legitimate yourself and or use government apps you are forced to use."
HN commenters consistently argue they, and therefore everyone else, must be able to use the same phone for everything
Otherwise corporate mobile OS alternatives like GrapheneOS are useless
For example if banking app, the proverbial example, requires some corporate mobile OS, then the owner must use this corporate mobile OS for everything else besides banking, too
If they have multiple phones, then presumably they must also use the corporate mobile OS on every one of them
No exceptions
Perhaps next we will see comments trying to argue that users can only have one phone
Or that the only computer user may own is a phone
These HN comments make little sense to me
Perhaps the people using multiple as phones mentioned in MineralWater's comment are not the people commenting on HN