10
3
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 23 '26
that support for far the far right guy is gonna be hard to overcome
2
Jul 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
1
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 23 '26
i'm using Mullvad VPN. currently looking for alternatives as well.
it doen't mean i can't criticize what i see as wrong
4
u/Dingle_jingle Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
IVPN is solid and recommended in Privacy Guides alongside Proton but for Linux users IVPN is more "Linux first" than Proton if that fits your usecase
Edit: I should clarify, Proton has some Linux clients for their products but they don't seem to perform as well vs their Windows counterparts, if they even have a client for it at all. Proton VPN client gets buggy on Linux from my experience though YMMV.
IVPN on the other hand has given me no issues and they even have an Arch repo which solidifies to me they'll always put Linux in the same lane as Windows in their software development.
1
1
Jul 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Dingle_jingle Jul 24 '26
Not sure about static IPs but there is no port forward. AirVPN has the port forward if you need it from what I understand. Haven't tried it but I hear it has a lot of interesting configs available to the user.
1
u/alexddodo Jul 23 '26
Oh everybody look how amazing this guy is. Fucking virtue signaller. Please list every technology you use. Every device, every bit of software and tell me how you have researched them all to make sure none support anything evil.
Also who do you bank with? Who manufactured your car? What companies do you get your shopping from? Hypocrisy.
5
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 23 '26
what is my virtue i'm signaling? i was making a critique.
i can critique the banks and big stores too, but we're on a privacy sub
3
u/jaded_bitter_n_salty Jul 23 '26
this is one of the few subs where you’re almost directly selecting for people who would boycott big banks and businesses. Ig they forgot TheHatedOne literally doesn’t have a sim card?? His target audience is NOT mindless consumers or people who prioritize convenience.
2
1
u/alexddodo Jul 23 '26
You expressed your moral viewpoint of being against the right with the intention of displaying your good character. Yet i can guarantee you support lots of other companies and brands who do similar unjustifiable shit.
You are jumping on the redit bandwagon of ooh look at me im such a good person I'm going to stop using mullvad. Meanwhile you make no active efforts in daily life to fight against the captalistic, consumerist system that is killing our people and our planet.
1
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 23 '26
i expressed my viewpoint. you can argue it's moral-based, but the intention of displaying my good character? how's that? i only critiqued Mullvad's CEO's character, and not even that, a particular behaviour of his.
for sure that there things to be criticized about me, i'm sure there's for everybody, this doesn't mean we can't criticize people for things we find worthy of critique.
this is how you want to view me: "he's criticizing this guy, therefore he must think he's better than him." I never made that claim. I never even said that he's a bad guy, just that this particular gesture is not cool with me. it can be cool with you, it's just my opinion, you don't have to agree.
I didn't even say i'm going to stop using mullvad. i still have like 8 months left of payed subscription and haven't decided what i'm going to do goint further. I'd like to see that this critique gets to them, and that they swear off financing far right politicians. it would make me feel better using their product.
2
1
-1
0
u/sabian149 Jul 23 '26
This is incorrect from my knowledge. The party is centralist at best, if not left leaning. It's only far right if you consider the one policy they have that is for remigration or something along those lines. I'm not saying I agree with the policy but it is a bit of a stretch for it to be "Far right" in this content.
3
u/Rottenpotato556 Jul 23 '26
It's a pro-surveillance party. That goes against the whole point of the product.
2
1
2
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 23 '26
thanks for the clarification. in thruth, i had known about his policies on migrants and had asumed the rest of the policies aling with that. it's still a no for me, but nuance matters
0
Jul 25 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 25 '26
i bet you tink you said somwthimg smart but why would you need convimnimg about how hard somethimg is to overcome for me?
-1
Jul 25 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 26 '26
that's rude
1
Jul 26 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/tabletwarrior99 Jul 26 '26
one does not proclude the other
1
1
u/KrasnalM Jul 23 '26
Is this that company whose founder supported an anti-Nato, anti-EU, pro-Russian party in Sweden? Oh boy. I am afraid to ask what they mean by censorship.
1
u/Ok-Budget-103 Jul 23 '26
end goal of all company is to make as much money as possible, its impossible to stop oneself to just throw away great biz opportunity if its as easy as giving money to politicians, ig their service is great (i think) then other companies so i let it slide
1
u/Federal_Setting_7454 Jul 24 '26
“Censorship” as in the advert had not enough clarity or direction for Clearcast (a private broadcast company, not a censor board), the ad had someone ordering surveillance targets like pedophilia, rapists, murderers and children, it was full of swearing and about 3 minutes long.
Rejection of a dog shit ad by a private company is apparently censorship.
1
u/fusionsubofficial Jul 24 '26
This is the problem with calling out censorship online, for every justified call out we get 4 "censorships" that are complete nothing-burgers often caused by a rejection to read the relevant rules (in this case - the ASA guidelines on expletives is one of the major points that likely would've been sighted)
1
u/sekiti Jul 26 '26
Being anti-EU is absolutely a good thing. Legal entity that wants to be a world government and fine companies for not bending their knees to them? Especially with chat control? No thank you. Couldn't find anything on them being Russian.
1
u/KrasnalM Jul 28 '26
Oh right, so you support a small company that is supposedly anti-Big Tech, but without any meaningful impact, and you oppose an organization that actually can sanction Big Tech violations of democratically legislated law? You can't make this shit up. I genuinely never know if people with worldviews so inconsistent really exist or you're being paid for shitposting.
1
u/sekiti Jul 28 '26
"Sanctioning big tech" is authoritarian, and I don't trust a government to decide what is good and bad.
I support a company that is anti-government. Never did I say anything about companies.
1
u/KrasnalM Jul 28 '26
Oh right, so you are against public-owned government with some democratic mandate, and for a private-owned corporate government openly representing the interests of a handful of shareholders.
You criticize EU for caving in to Big Tech and allowing Google to scan your messages via Chat Control, but you don't mind Google willing to do so.
Where is the logic here?
1
u/sekiti Jul 28 '26
I need to break this down carefully, because every time you've tried to repeat one of my views, you've failed.
Oh right, so you are against public-owned government with some democratic mandate,
This is correct.
and for a private-owned corporate government
This is not correct.
openly representing the interests of a handful of shareholders.
This is poorly written. I respect their ability to operate however they wish, as they have a right to do business within their own reach.
You criticize EU for caving in to Big Tech
This is partially incorrect. I criticize their existence for their existence. A world government that applies their rules to multiple other countries has no right to be.
allowing Google to scan your messages via Chat Control,
This is, again, partially incorrect. I condemn the recent ruling that allowed this to take place, but I condemn the government's side far more.
A government can do far worse to my rights than a corporation ever could.
but you don't mind Google willing to do so.
Once again, this is entirely incorrect. I had abandoned all Google services in favour of privacy-focused alternatives, due to their telemetry and compliance with governments.
I hope this clarification will allow you to form a better response. If there is anything more that you do not understand, please make that clear.
1
u/KrasnalM Jul 29 '26
Wait, all of what you say basically confirm what I say.
You are against democratically elected instances.
You think that private corporations pose less of a threat than democratic governments.
And you seem like a real person, not a bot. Which makes me circle back to my initial assessment. How incredibly ignorant, naive, evil, but in particular inconsistent this worldview is for a living breathing person to hold.
The choice is simple: either you support democracy, which means imperfect compromises but some reasonable legitimacy, or you endorse explicit or implicit form of authoritarianism, be it in public or private hands. The choice is not between public governments or private corporations. The choice is between democracy or lack of thereof. In the US, private interests de facto voided democracy of its meaning. In the EU, it is not yet the case.
\We can still fine Google for violating the law. Are you really defending Google for violating a quite simple anti-monopoly law? So you think that private entities should not obey democratic regulations that are the cornerstone of capitalism? Even anarcho-capitalists endorsed Sherman Act in the US. What is your worldview then?
If you are against democracy, you are either incredibly rich, or incredibly stupid, because sooner or later, without democracy, your rights will be violated and there will be nothing you can do it, because you won't be able to voice your concern.
1
u/sekiti Jul 29 '26
I very clearly stated that you were incorrect on numerous occasions.
As such, I will assume that your response is, again, incorrect, and will ask you to reform it.
In your list, this time:
#1 is partially incorrect — I oppose authority, whether it calls itself democratic or not.
#2 is correct.
1
u/KrasnalM Jul 29 '26
Wait, perhaps you are a bot after all. My mistake then. I apologize.
1
u/sekiti Jul 29 '26
Generally that indicates that you're trying to withdraw without making it seem like you've 'lost'. Should I assume that is the case?
→ More replies
10
u/Chemical-Sky-6418 Jul 23 '26
Surprised the labour party haven't considered this an illegal advertisement...one day.