• khorovodoved@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    I do not understand where does your optimism come from? In what little that we do know they describe the exact same system using the exact same wording as google. If they mean some other thing then they should spend a couple of hours and describe how is it different. And before that the worst should be assumed. It is to dangerous to treat it in any other way.

    • anothermember@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I don’t like to ever assume negative intent without good evidence. I think I’m taking the neutral rather than optimistic view here. If you want me to speculate whether this new company is good or evil, that would just be my speculation; it would depend how they intend to make money out of it, from my gut instinct I can’t say they give me any specific Google vibes yet.

      • ReversalHatchery@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        It’s not about the google vibes, it’s that this thing could be standardized and used by several programs and websites.

        here’s an example. with google’s integrity system, most phones can not go through attestation. an exception is phones that can run GrapheneOS. but for apps that require attestation, the developers need to change their app so that it accepts valid attestations of systems that use the GrapheneOS key. such apps can decide to keep only accepting google approved systems.

        so far it looks like this will work similarly enough that software you run will be able to be picky about what distribution you use.