what smartphone can I buy that won't be giving my shekels

flip hone or no phone at all to escape the botnet.

>>61841180
fpbp

>>61841156
Windows phone

Buy a used Android and install a Linux distro on it

>>61841156
BlackBerry maybe

What about sailfish OS?

>>61841156
Blackberry Q10

>>61841156
Ubuntu phone

we betrayed Ubuntuphone

< inb4 pajeet Google shill
To be fair, the people behind the Android OS, the self-driving AI cars, DeepMind, etc. aren't the same fucks in HR and other managerial positions playing politics instead of...you know...doing something productive instead of playing ball with Political Tribalism (TM).

And anyway, you know you can roll Android with GAPPS right? F-Droid? Yelp Store for snatching APKs off the Gulag Store? Lucky Patcher and proxy any requests to the Play Store to LP instead?

>>61842169
intermediate mode: receive and place phone calls
hard mode: and mobile data

>>61841180
This. I refuse to use a phone, because even custom ROMs are reliant on proprietary components, firmware, and baseband, making the hardware itself insecure and restrictive.

>>61844608
So how do you communicate when you're not at home?

>>61841156
Sailfish OS or a BlackBerry

>>61844644
So you do have a phone. What is Sailfish?

>>61841156
Nokia

I hate SJWs. They always flood /tv/ and /g/ with identity polit--

Oh wait, I'm thinking of "anti-SJWs". Almond status: activated.

>>61844636
As some of the /pol/acks might observe, there's no real NEED to communicate with people who are not immediately present when not at home.

File: IMG_20170804_123657.jpg (123KB, 1080x1194px) Image search: [Google]

123KB, 1080x1194px

>people care more about office politics than bulk surveillance
>not realizing that this media circus is orchestrated by Google for max news coverage to overshadow Assange's book
>not realizing that Google funds politicians on both sides of the spectrum equally
>not realizing Google is conducting research on political regime change and has been doing so for years
>not realizing that Google is a surrogate arm of the State and Defense departments
>not realizing that Google is data mining you as we speak by using capcha to tie together your online profile and your 4chan posts so they have a perfect view of you political opinions
>not realizing /pol/ is the reason Google hired moot
B-b-but muh SJW's are the reason Google is evil, amirite?

WHY ARE YOU BUYING SHIT THAT ISN'T FAIRPHONE

https://devices.ubports.com/#/

>>61844644
>>61844693
I see you two are allergic to pussy

>>61844699
Really powers up the pecans, doesn't it?

>>61844713
>putting your dick into a bitch that's impressed by a telephone
Tyrone, is that you?

>>61844711

While it is much more insidious than most know, we must propagandize and convince these fucking retards on /pol/ and the alt-right that they should take this seriously, even if they don't understand what is really going on.

File: SailfishOS_Screenshot1.png (705KB, 720x1280px) Image search: [Google]

705KB, 720x1280px

>>61844685
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sailfish_OS

>>61844703
I see they don't have much friends

>>61844730
>/pol/ ugly autist detected
I see you can't get quality pussy in general

nobody cares cumskin
>>>/pol/

>>61844730
No, this is Chad.

>>61844733
No, leave /pol/ alone.

>>61844749
>implying that friends can't wait for you
That doesn't sound very friendly.

>>61844774
>quality woman
>attracted by shiny shit
Your lower IQ is showing, nigger.

>>61844733
The thing is, these people want to give Google the middle finger rather than expose them. Look at those fags convincing people to install ad naseum. If they used pizzagate level autism to dig up dirt on Google, Facebook and Amazon and make at least as much news coverage as the foemer, then we'd actually be making progress towards real tangible change. Too bad that was only because of hatred of Hillary rather than for justice, I can see this making some /pol/acks abandon Google, but let's be honest. This is gonna blow over in a week. Wouldn't be surprised is years later it's revealed this weebsite is darpa funded.

>>61844822

Who cares? The progressives can not run a business long term, let it rot. The only thing that annoys me is the right's incredible incompetence and arrogance.

pajeet google shill here.

he insulted the company in a company-wide memo.

people get fired at other companies for much less than what he said about Google.

it's a private business, faggots. they can support whatever company culture they wanna.

>>61844711
google is ultimately trying to serve ads as effectively as possible to generate the greatest returns for their investors.

if you're afraid of the surveillance state, your actual concern is with the government when it demands access to user information collected by every company.

>>61844842
>The progressives can not run a business long term, let it rot.
really? what are your data for this? Most of the US tech industry is centered in blue states.

>>61844815
I'm not black you miserable man lol
Women are followers bud

>>61844842
You don't get it. Google is squarely centralist, it's office culture is progressive. Google's motivations are strictly the motivations of the US government.

>>61844891

And do they hire for profitability or to fit quotas that constantly change? Is this a long term sustainable practice?

A similar question, can Germany invite a million third worlders who don't work every year? We both know they can't, just as corporations can't hire shitty workers and survive.

>>61844853

Agreed. Because of this I will never buy their stock.

>>61844900

Office culture seems to have affected far more than the offices. Their hiring practices seem to reach deep, at least from what I read.

>>61844853
And in order to keep their shareholders happy, Google is effectively a Boeing tier contractor for the US. They don't just hand over their data because the law forces them to, they provide it as a service. Google is more than just profiling, they help analysis and correct trends with the say of the State department. And they get paid significantly for these services, not to mention the security of their business.

>>61844936
Office culture and the policies of a conglomerate are two different things. They can cultivate their internal politics however they want, to the tune of whatever is popular, doesn't matter when the motivations of the conglomerate as a whole are in one other direction.

>>61844936
>Their hiring practices seem to reach deep, at least from what I read.

Recruitment only. Supposedly after you're interviewed you aren't judged differently. i.e. get more minorites to apply, then treat them the same.

>>61844891
>implying that Democrats all fall in line when the corporate appinted parent figure says to
>implying that partisan voters vote for anything but myths and cultural critique
>implying that voting has any real effect on policy outside of the margins
no

>>>/pol/ has completely derailed a thread yet again

>>61844989

Are they? Did you listen to the interviews by the manifesto writer? According to my research, they are literally hiring based on race and many progressives are attempting to change the related videos in youtube and the search results in their browser.

Is this really sustainable? Come on. People will get fed up of searching for something and having politicized nonsense from leftist tabloids come up. If this continues google will lose market share. You can't possibly see this as healthy for the corporation.

>>61845011

Perhaps.

>Google's main objective is to suck up every bit of data you generate online
>Collaborate with NSA for data exfil
>Abuse tax loopholes religiously
>Abuse monopoly status across the world to promote their own products and lock in users

/g/ doesn't even fucking bat an eye. The Snowden threads lasted all about a week after the leaks and that was it. But holy fuck, mention the fact that a guy was fired for expressing some /pol/ opinion and /g/ goes berserk.

Truly a shit board.

>>61841156
Not possible the radio in you phone is run by tech companies that are notorious for finding sjw.The radios are proprietary and no free.

>>61844936
>And do they hire for profitability or to fit quotas that constantly change? Is this a long term sustainable practice?

I think there's macroeconomic utility toward giving a leg up to underrepresented groups for its own sake. I don't think institutional discrimination exists in any significant form today, but that doesn't mean we have a level playing field. Socioeconomic status is inherited, culture is inherited. There are lasting effects of past discrimination.

For example, men have traditionally dominated technical fields for unmeritocratic reasons (women barred from participating in academics). Girls have an additional obstacle to success in technical fields because in many cases they have to be pioneers for their gender. It's more difficult to enroll in a course where you're the only girl and a lot of the guys have been programming since they were 8. I think it's also fair to question when we can expect that the playing field has been leveled, but there's evidence we still have a ways to go.

Obviously the other extreme is just to set hiring quotas approaching or greater than the proportion of women in the population, and that probably will take a large toll on productivity because preferencing certain genders is a confounding variable when it comes to selecting the most competent workforce.

So my answer is I think maximizing competitiveness of the economy will involve an optimal balance between trying to provide a level playing field where there isn't one, which makes for a more meritocratic society in the long-term, and just selecting for credentials relevant to estimated performance of the employee, which is more meritocratic for the short term.

And there are gender-neutral ways to accomplish the former. Like offering introductory CS classes in high-school for students with no prior experience in programming. It is a way to increase female participation without actively discouraging male participation.

>>61845021
Again, I have to keep repeating myself. Nothing is more sustainable than an active relationship with the US government. You keep asserting that this is a spectrum issue when Google has a broad view of it already. They already optimize their searches by audience and they proved during the Arabian Spring that they can predict the polical climate better than any reality TV "analyst." What they are doing is planned and calculated and with the direction of the US. That should be the main concern, not some giant fantasy football game that everyone wants to take a part of for some off reason. I'm sorry leftism offends you, but Google is a bigger problem than that and far beyond it. Not to mention they LITERALLY spend the same amount of money lobbying on both sides. Their office politics are a distraction.

>>61844699
Probably because you are a pos degenerate SJW yourself. Majority of /g/ should be gassed for their degenerate world views.

>>61845024
>Abuse tax loopholes religiously
not sure which ones you mean, but why should google be held to different standards than other companies?

>Abuse monopoly status across the world to promote their own products and lock in users
I don't think you know what a monopoly is

>>61845086
>I think there's macroeconomic utility toward giving a leg up to underrepresented groups for its own sake
>maximizing competitiveness of the economy
None of this helps the workers. Fuck the bourgeoisie. They largely inherited their status and don't need help.

>>61845087

Hey can your tinfoil hat tell me why Obama didn't use it to help Hilary win especially if it can predict political outcomes and climate? Thanks

>>61845136
well perhaps we can question the system by which we distribute resources in our society but i think it's good to have a strong economy in any case.

>>61845024
>/g/ doesn't even fucking bat an eye.

How's your first day on /pol/ you twat?

>>61845120
>aha whattaboutism
Just because Google isn't the only one, doesn't make it any less OK.

>mo·nop·o·ly
>məˈnäpəlē/Submit
>noun
>the exclusive possession or control of the supply or trade in a commodity or service.

http://gs.statcounter.com/search-engine-market-share
>Search: 92%
http://www.idc.com/promo/smartphone-market-share/os
>Android: 85%
https://fortunelords.com/youtube-statistics/
>YouTube: 1.3 billion users and 5 billion videos watched per day
https://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=0&qpcustomd=0
>Chrome: 60%

How is this not a monopoly? Especially since Google rigorously promotes Chrome on all their websites, or that Android-Manufacture agreements require ALL Google applications to be installed on their phone in order to access the GPlay market. Or that Google bullies news websites to allow them to scrape their information (for free, so they can put articles within google news, displaying Google advertisements), or otherwise their SEO suffers greatly?

This is a monopoly. And if you still can't see it, you're blind.

>>61845171
>i think it's good to have a strong memeconomy
Concrete material benefits are more important than memes. Don't kids do their homework before they go out and play anymore?

>>61845232
>not 100%
>not monopoly
Are you looking for the word "hegemony" perhaps?

>>61845269
You don't have to own 100% of the market in order to be considered a monopoly. I don't know where you got that idea from.

LineageOS + f-droid will save lives OP

We need to start compiling a list of phones with a open bootloader on the wiki.

Phones without a open bootloader require exploits to enable a ROM.

File: masturbategoogone.png (162KB, 477x434px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 477x434px

>>61844699
>Almond status: activated.

>>61845273
monopoly on what? alternatives exist for virtually every service they offer.

>>61845269
>Concrete material benefits are more important than memes. Don't kids do their homework before they go out and play anymore?
So if it doesn't help the economy today then we shouldn't invest in it? There goes education, all the roads, rail, the internet, nuclear energy tech, satellites, NIH...

File: hillaryugly.jpg (47KB, 434x640px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 434x640px

>>61845142
>help Hilary win especially if it can predict political outcomes and climate
Because hillary was never ahead in the polls your enormous douche bag! The media was lying all along and votes were being thrown her way illegally! Sorry if the truth hurt your feels snowflake.

>>61845232
>>aha whattaboutism
>Just because Google isn't the only one, doesn't make it any less OK
Why isn't it? It shouldn't be business's responsibility to do anything but deliver to its shareholders. Businesses shouldn't be punished for doing the right thing by becoming noncompetitive. Government is responsible for setting up a fair framework of regulation and taxes.

>>61845356
When people talk about muh economy, they are usually talking about high finance. What you have just listed are concrete material benefits that can be provided with or without high finance, and arguably much better without.

>>61845171
>the system by which we distribute resources in our society
Decentralization will fix everything senpai. And the government(s) will fight it tooth and nail because it takes away their power and control.

https://diasporafoundation.org/
Just one example

>>61845409

I get the media was wrong and probably lied

But why didn't Obama use the real info from Google to help Hilary win

I don't give a shit she lost I ain't no snowflake but I'm not a mental midget that believes in easily debunkable conspiracy theories

>Government has all powerful information system they can abuse
>Don't

???

>>61845425
>When people talk about muh economy, they are usually talking about high finance
I'm not certain what you're getting at, but a level playing field on which everyone can compete on the basis of relevant talent is a "concrete material benefit"

>>61845142
>implying that Eric Schmidt wasn't closely aligned with the Hillary campaign
>implying that the people were at all willing to consider a party that just ran a fake primary and tilted the playing field toward the neoliberal candidate at every stop
Nope, and that's why all these bourgeois scolds are calling Democrats and independents immature and juvenile for not voting for our continued infantilization at their hands, for not unifying under their (((enlightened))) rule.

>>61845475
>compete
Dude, you're a cuck. Collusion ALWAYS works better than competition. Go back to /v/, liberal.

>>61845457
>Decentralization will fix everything senpai.
lol, just like somalia

>And the government(s) will fight it tooth and nail because it takes away their power and control.
who? the people we elect to represent our interests? I want them to have power and control where it matters to me.

>>61845484
ad hominem

>>61845476

>implying that the people were at all willing to consider a party that just ran a fake primary and tilted the playing field toward the neoliberal candidate at every stop
Hillary had more nuanced and intelligent policy than trump, but she was corporatist to the core. Whereas Trump is and was obviously corporatist, incompetent, and malicious. He's been a train wreck in slow motion. He's only served a demographic that considers revenge against us liberals for every perceived slight we committed over the last 8 years to be progress.
What the DNC did was inexcusable but you can't tell me it was an easy choice.

>(((enlightened))) rule.
sorry, i vote for policy, not race

>>61845503
Memes don't even deserve coherent responses. So address the 1/3 that wasn't ad hominem. When, and more importantly for whom, has antagonistic duplication of effort ever helped the mass on net more than it has the ruling classes?

>>61845533
>nuanced and intelligent
There's nothing nuanced or intelligent about neoliberalism. It's pure sophistry.
>Trump is and was obviously corporatist, incompetent, and malicious
So you're saying that we should ignore campaign communications? If only the corporate media would let us!
Competence... well, bourgeois competence doesn't serve the proletariat. I voted for Stein because the voting system tries to manipulate me into allegiance to one or the other leader and I chose the least oligarch, least leaderly among them.
>What the DNC did was inexcusable but you can't tell me it was an easy choice.
Liberals really do need to be gassed though, if for nothing else than thinking that we are theirs to manipulate. I'd hoped that conservatives of conscience would link up with those of us on the socialist left to help, but it seems the two-party machinery has dissuaded them from making common cause with "muh commies" and that. You may have won this time.

>>61845533
Adding,
>sorry, i vote for policy, not race
If you vote for bourgeois liberal policy rather than a welfare state, you are a major part of the problem.

>>61841156
If you use a smartphone your soul is already lost.

>>61844853

>tired memes

>>61845599
>So address the 1/3 that wasn't ad hominem. When, and more importantly for whom, has antagonistic duplication of effort ever helped the mass on net more than it has the ruling classes?
Stop with your inane sophistry. It's transparent as air.

>There's nothing nuanced or intelligent about neoliberalism.
What policy specifically? Net neutrality was kinda nice. Kinda nice to build a healthcare system instead of a "landscape".

>>61845603
i don't blame trump voters because i know it was a difficult choice

>>61845645
Answer the question.
>What policy specifically? Net neutrality was kinda nice. Kinda nice to build a healthcare system instead of a "landscape".
Net neutrality was only barely official policy, and (because the affairs of the bourgeoisie are the only affairs a bourgeois government deems within its ambit) there was far too much deference to law enforcement in the open internet policies.
A system of 20% free money is not a healthcare system. Every supposed Democrat who has spoken against Canadian-style single-payer needs to die in pain.
If you're going to stand here and try to argue that neoliberalism as a general mode of governance, that the market is always more beneficial than the alternatives by pure definition, is superior, or even acceptable, then dying in pain will be too good for you.