> This isn't even possible given how updates on GrapheneOS work. The update client doesn't send identifiers to the update server, and the update server only hosts static files.
> Rossmann either doesn't understand this, or he made it up to get more views, or possibly to entertain fellow Kiwi Farms members.
Expecting a layman to know that is not reasonable. The argument is not about the GOS updates work in practice.
It is about the "perpection", from Rossmann's perspective that the lead dev of the OS is hostile against him.
Humans are not purely rational machines, and given the choice of either 1) spend hours auditing source code and updates pipelines (every release ?) and 2) stop using it for critical purpose, the latter is the easier choice, especially for a busy person like him.
> To be honest, I don't think that he didn't understand that he couldn't be targeted. He continued using GrapheneOS for months after the video. As I understand it, it was clear in a few videos months after the initial video was published.
For all we know, he is using it on his secondary device where he has removed what he deems critical.
Again, Rossmann NEVER said "don't use Graphene OS", or "Graphene OS lack security" or anything of the sort.
If anything, even after that video, he kept recommending GOS whenever he talked about privacy.
His argument is that he did not feel safe knowing using software from a hostile developer; and that he can't be bothered / not qualified to audit the code well enough to make it worth it (which is reasonable if you ask me, and I dare say most people).
Edit:
> Rossmann either doesn't understand this
Again, I agree with you here. He does not understand. He trusted the developer(s) to know what they are doing, but they broke that trust by being unreasonable, to say the least.
He is under no obligation to understand.
As for what you stated after that, I won't comment on it as I don't read minds, and pretty sure neither do you.