You can't. Some might say that the less adversaries monitor you the better. But you will never be private unless you ditch all the proprietary software and practice good opsec on the internet and in real life. Hate to break it to you, but privacy is fundamentally a binary thing: you are either spied upon or you are not, regardless if it's one hundred companies or just one.
kaidezee
Few people can be sure of that, because it would require digging in their assembly code which can take a lot of time, but they have a financial incentive to do that and they love money, so all sane people assume that they very much do. And they also get caught sometimes (multiple times!), so thinking they would just stop would be foolish.
I don't undurstand how Graphene can bigger than Linux on this list.
VPNs know who you are and what websites you visit, so no privacy nor anonymity there. With Tor... It's complicated. That's why we have guides like this: http://blog.nowherejezfoltodf4jiyl6r56jnzintap5vyjlia7fkirfsnfizflqd.onion/opsec.
So, you're basically saying that doing things the way you think works the best and not being afraid of new things, instead of simply choosing the path of least resistance gets you on the autism spectrum? If that's the case, then I think "normal" might be the biggest lie I've ever been told.
lo
The one that OP asked to "confirm".
Don't like it for one simple reason: no integration with the distribution. Flatpak is this sort universal solution that works, but doesn't necessarily work hand-in-hand with the distro, unlike package managers.
Are you the Dell or the Kubernetes :P
I don't talk much outside of English-speaking communities, but I can say with confidence that I've never heard that.
More like... Google Dox! Ha, ha... That was really bad, but I couldn't help myself. I'm sorry :3
A bit late, but you might find useful information in this book: http://blog.nowherejezfoltodf4jiyl6r56jnzintap5vyjlia7fkirfsnfizflqd.onion/opsec. Not all of it might be relevant to you, i.e. you are probably not doing anything that would require plausible deniability, and probably some other things. But it has some really good info, in my opinion.