Replying to Avatar GrapheneOS

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqwamvxt2tr50ghu4fdw47ksadnt0p277nv0vfhplmv0n0z3243zyqkmdjma nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq294d6xdgvx30g2wvezpluueyx9ua22vzfryz04504l5z9e5hcq2qw6c3cg nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq0npj3gydmv40m70ehemmal6vsdyfl7tewgvz043g54p0x23y0s8q7r6usq You very clearly aren't a developer or security researcher. You lack basic technical knowledge. You simply lie and fabricate things endlessly. It's a strange way to spend your time and isn't useful to anyone. Please stop posting replies to our project, project members and community members. Thanks.

I don't care whether you consider me a developer or a security researcher.

What basic technical knowledge do I need? Why not teach it to me?

How many times are you going to accuse me of lying and fabricating things without discussing an example?

Would you like to try nostr instead of spamming with double-replies due to a character limit on your end and begging me to stop replying?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpqwamvxt2tr50ghu4fdw47ksadnt0p277nv0vfhplmv0n0z3243zyqkmdjma nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq294d6xdgvx30g2wvezpluueyx9ua22vzfryz04504l5z9e5hcq2qw6c3cg nostr:nprofile1qy2hwumn8ghj7un9d3shjtnddaehgu3wwp6kyqpq0npj3gydmv40m70ehemmal6vsdyfl7tewgvz043g54p0x23y0s8q7r6usq You aren't a privacy or security researcher. You aren't a developer. You aren't technical. You don't have access to classified information unavailable to others as you pretend. Insecure products you promote are in fact not a way to avoid the unsubstantiated backdoors you claim exist everywhere else.

Repeating yourself won't make me care whether you consider me a researcher or developer. I am technical.

Where have I pretended to have access to classified information unavailable to others?

What insecure products have I promoted?

Why can't you specify which part of my backdoor claims is unsubstantiated - that they are present, or that the concept of them is incompatible with the concept of end to end encryption? It's difficult to continue addressing your misunderstanding on this point without clarification