If so, I'd love to know which OEM you're thinking of who ships an Android distro more secure than GrapheneOS.
And then we can move the goalposts to "more secure distro with GrapheneOS" which isn't part of the conversation until you dragged it out.
GrapheneOS typically ships security updates within a day. But most of Samsung's phones get quarterly security updates[1]. There will never be a primary source with a Samsung insider saying "we're fine with our customers being vulnerable to widely exploited security bugs for the next 89 days, in order to save our massive corporation a few thousand dollars a month." But their priorities are revealed by their actions.
If the statement "OEMs don't care about security" is trivially proven false, as you said, then you should be able to prove it trivially by naming even just a single OEM whose update cadence matches GrapheneOS's.
The numbers aren't zero, certainly. Nor does it imply directly proportional levels of effort. But they are incredibly obviously given wholly different levels of attention on nearly all phones, by nearly all phone manufacturers.
(I'll let you find the others yourself.)
How did you think Pixels got features GrapheneOS needs if the OEM wouldn't care about adding the Titan chip, modem APIs and all the other security features that are featured on pretty much every launch doc?
Cut the crap already.
Your trivially proving things can't involve asking other people to prove the opposite of things. You've instantly backed down.
> And then we can move the goalposts
Why? You haven't done anything except ask others to do things. You've moved the goalposts from trivially falsifiable, and started begging.
Android release notes are easy to find: https://source.android.com/docs/whatsnew/release-notes
So are marketing materials: https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/platforms/android...
and so are marketing materials: https://blog.google/products-and-platforms/devices/pixel/goo...
and each of those shows that security is pretty much a constant focus for everyone.
Dismissing all the security work done by other people because they didn't jump on your feature is insane behaviour.