[throwawayapples]

> I wouldn't hold up GrapheneOS as a good example of more freedom compared to Apple or Google tbh.

I don't see why we can't have both, but this doesn't really a fair criticism of GP's comment. The specific word GP used was 'privacy', not 'freedom', and you are attacking GrapheneOS's stance on the latter, not the former.

GrapheneOS is more focused on privacy over freedom, as you said ("their stance on user privacy is so extreme that it gets in the way of user freedom"). They have chosen to prioritize one over the other.

> For freedom, I'd moreso point towards projects like LineageOS.

This might be true, but LineageOS doesn't have access to microcode either, and certainly GrapheneOS is more 'private' than Lineage, assuming that GrapheneOS hasn't been compromised either internally or at some point in the AOSS supply chain. Except for niche mfgs like PinePhone et al, Google is probably the most free of the major manufacturers (ironically, less private but more free).

I agree that we should aim for both freedom (as in free speech, not necessarily as in free beer although it'd be nice!) and privacy.

Both are critically important, and the efficacy of the latter depends in large part on the former.