When Windows Vista first came out, I was one of the earliest adopters (or tried to be an early adopter) who beta tested it before most people would even know about it. It was terrible. Every mouse-click caused the screen to go dark and a warning about specific security issues showed on the dark screen. You had to agree to the security risks at almost every click before you could do anything. Since I had no clue about most of these security issues or even what the implications even were, I just agreed to everything without understanding the risks. I did the same where ever I could, to change all of the defaults to get rid of the screen darkening and warnings with almost every click. Agree, agree, agree. Since I didn’t usually understand the risks, I quit even trying to understand them and just agreed to everything to make the OS useable.
When you use Pure OS, I imagine that Purism has configured the O S to protect your privacy. Most of us are not security and software experts. We need many different things to just work without understanding all of the technical issues. How does Purism balance getting everything to work for average users who are not experts, while maintaining security? The first time I need something to work that I don’t understand the risks of and that Purism has tried to protect me from, I am likely to agree to whatever is asked because the OS is useless if I can’t use the apps I need. So I get to decide if I want to be safe against unknown risks or to have a tool that is practical for me to use. How does Purism recommend the average user address these issues? What does Purism do to mitigate these kinds of challenges?