this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2025
695 points (91.6% liked)

Privacy

32796 readers
1761 users here now

A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.

Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.

In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.

Some Rules

Related communities

much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 10 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

They showed political stances all the time when it comes to privacy and antitrust, just look at their blog. Why wouldn't they? What they do is also political, as a company.

[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

I think that's a different thing. That is a political stance but it's not picking sides. People who want to organise Nazi rallys and people who need to communicate without getting attacked by Nazis both have reasons to use encrypted email. When you pick one over the other, you've cut the size of your userbase.

[โ€“] [email protected] 5 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

I would be perfectly happy with a VPN that was openly anti-nazi.

[โ€“] [email protected] 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

That's not the point. A neutral stance VPN has all the anti-Nazis as customers, and all the Nazis. I would prefer anti-Nazi as well but I get that that a neutral stance means they can have more customers, something they need for economy of scale.

If they had stated their anti-trump stance then the freeze peach lemmy instances would probably have all their Nazis cancelling their proton subscriptions.

Honestly I hope all the cancellations on our side aren't balanced by a bunch of Nazis signing up after seeing the comments.

[โ€“] [email protected] 3 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 48 minutes ago) (1 children)

He's trying to have it both ways though. He wants to support trump and then be like "nooooo! What are you talking about? We're neutral!"

Yeah, with the same Swiss neutrality that doesn't care whose teeth the gold came from.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I don't think I quite get what the benefit is to them of supporting Trump's pick. What was it he was hoping to gain, not from the pick but from his comment?

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 1 hour ago

What benefit do all those who have kissed trump's ring thus far get? All I know is that I'm not about to trust my privacy to someone with 88 in their username. I only signed up for proton last month because of trump. I'll be leaving for another service for the same reason.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think they picked in this case either. Like they didn't when they cooperated with dem senators in the past. They are cooperating or praising whichever side advances policies that can ultimately help privacy.

[โ€“] [email protected] 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

That was probably their thought too. However, they have misjudged the Lemmy (and I think reddit) population on this, and I would argue that worse than the initial comment is the absolute lack of recognition (in follow up comments) that what they said could be taken as an endorsement of a government that is trying to actively harm a significant portion of the US Proton users.

[โ€“] [email protected] -1 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

I think he actually acknowledged that fact in later comments. Anyway, this is a far smaller sin than all the stuff people are creatively accusing him of.

Apparently now he is a Nazi, and I think this case was the last nail in the coffin for me to think that political discourse can exist.

[โ€“] [email protected] 1 points 2 hours ago

If it helps, most people don't follow politics at all. And their votes are based on very little knowledge of what they are voting for.

I'm still a believer that if you put people in a room together instead of online, you'd get both sides of the aisle agreeing on 95% of things, once each side had a chance to explain their viewpoint (and made sure google was available to settle most disputes).