Unnecessary and deeply concerning bow to the new “king”
Update: position got backed up by an official Proton post on Mastodon, it’s an official Proton statement now. https://mastodon.social/@protonprivacy/113833073219145503
Update 2, plot-twist: they removed this response from Mastodon - seems they realize it exploded into their face!
Oh, goddammit.
The writing was on the wall for proton for a while now
No it hasn’t. Back this claim up with some evidence
Yea! I’m interested, I did not see that coming…
Neither did I.
They’ve been cooperating with law enforcement and handing data to the cops proactively since 2021.
Pay attention.
What do you mean with “proactively”?
And then we have the communists making Lemmy. Is there any moderate developers lol. Valve is the only big company I can think of that isn’t annoying. All the faceless Linux devs are good too
Glances at the child gambling enabled by the steam marketplace, an issue being blatantly ignored by Valve leadership.
Buddy, I don’t know how to tell you this. I love Valve for all the good they do, but they got some serious skeletons, too.
Valve representatives were asked point blank if the third party gambling sites have a positive influence on their bottom line, and the dude replying sweated bullets for several seconds before nervously going “we… don’t have any data on that” while the rest stared daggers at him.
Coffeezilla has a recent video on the situation.
I love Steam, but thinking about switching to gog over this. Anybody have any ideas how we can let valve know this isn’t okay?
I did this years ago and have like 500 games on GOG. Ended up going back to Steam due to features that gog just doesn’t have. Sigh.
I have a feeling I would feel the same. Its nice having everything in one place. What was missing for you?
All the social features, the workshop, easy browsing, and guides just off the top of my head. GOG is still good for those really retro 90s and early 2000s games though
I understand your frustration but I’m not casting some wide net here. I’m simply talking about political ideologies being in your face.
Link to whatever you’re talking about?
The timestamp in the coffeezilla video.
Watch the whole thing for more detail.
If it’s between fascism and communism, the answer is pretty fucking simple imo. Only one of those ideologies considers all people to be equal.
And no, I am not a communist, and I would not choose communism unless it was the only alternative to fascism.
Totally understand what you’re saying. Obviously I am on Lemmy. Just wish we didn’t have ideologies in our face all the time
I fear for what will happen to valve when Gabr step down in the future
I have a bigger fear of what happens to Linux when Torvalds retires. He took a break a while back, and it was an absolute shit show of a power struggle.
Give some credit. Even if they aren’t politically aligned with your, they did make Lemmy open source for others to run with.
deleted by creator
lol got downvote bombed for desiring normal. Fucking Lemmy man. Honestly don’t know why I even use this platform anymore.
deleted by creator
fuck off booooooot licker
The fuck are you on about?
Standing up for the little guy. Huh. Is that why billionaires and CEO are throwing literal tens of millions at Trump? Why he staffed his cabinet with billionaires? Why the center of his policy is tax cuts for the giga wealthy, at the expense of everyone else and the national debt, at a time where wealth inequality is literally tearing the country apart?
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/15/trump-windfall-fundraising-500-million
https://www.axios.com/2024/12/09/trump-wealth-cabinet-politicians-billionaires
These are objective, public facts. Like, I’m way more conservative than Lemmy’s center and willing acknowledge any good Trump does, but what reality is this guy living in? Who is this statement for? Who the heck does he think is using Proton services? He just pissed off his employees and customers for… What?
Probably doesn’t want to get banned in the US… Or so my copium tells me.
Silver lining is that Proton is owned by a non-profit.
I was thinking this for a second, but is this really plausible? Normally when we talk about corporations we talk about how powerful they are and how they use different nations to locate headquarters and offices in order to mitigate legal and tax obligations. We regularly talk about how governments can’t reign them in and how they act with impunity.
But now? “They HAVE to capitulate. They are just doing it to survive.” Really? Do we really believe that? Or is it more likely that this is what they want and if they didn’t, they’d be fighting tooth and nail to stop it? I’m with the second option honestly.
That’s what I don’t get. If the proton CEO was actually raging MAGA, the last thing he should do, strategically, is stoke fires by stirring this up. That’s business 101.
…He must want conservative’s ears for some kind of policy issue, maybe to the detriment of Proton’s competitors. But what?
Seems a lot of people share this view that somehow he’s for the little guy, despite quite clearly being for the opposite. It’s the same over the pond, there’s a paranoia held by many that the government is out to persecute the common people. Very strange on both sides, it’s almost Orwell levels of Newspeak.
The official @protonprivacy@mastodon.social account replied and doubled down
protonprivacy@mastodon.social - @jonah
Corporate capture of Dems is real. In 2022, we campaigned extensively in the US for anti-trust legislation.
Two bills were ready, with bipartisan support. Chuck Schumer (who coincidently has two daughters working as big tech lobbyists) refused to bring the bills for a vote.
At a 2024 event covering antitrust remedies, out of all the invited senators, just a single one showed up - JD Vance.
1/2
protonprivacy@mastodon.social - @jonah By working on the front lines of many policy issues, we have seen the shift between Dems and Republicans over the past decade first hand.
Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost.
Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.
2/2
(Less importantly, my response)
So sounds like their main concern is addressing the abuses of the FAANG monopolies, and only a Republican has talked to them about it.
I guess that is understandable in that very narrow lens, but it’s a bit laughable considering how all the big tech companies are also cozying up to the Trump administration. All this has done for me is make me wary of anything Proton does now.
Also the obviously reactionary and self-interested history of right wing reaction to FAANG, which largely has been fueled by a backlash to restraints on misinformation, and is riddled with special case exceptions (e.g. Palestine).
Actually I disagree on the latest part. I actually questioned, why google and Facebook had to go kiss the ring and pay some bucks to Trump, and didn’t have to do that before? This for me is a sign of a disalignment between big tech and the administration.
That said, it’s very much possible (I would say likely) trump won’t do shit and he just happens to have the “correct” position on this particular issue because it can be used to attack the Californian elite (I.e. dem elite). But it’s a matter of fact that it’s auspicable he will follow up with action on his words on this, even if for the wrong reasons.
Its more that trump is very transactional. He couldnt give to shit if corpations are fleecing people so as long he gets a peice. Its like businesses paying the mafia for “protection”.
Exactly this. It’s not necessarily that he’s like a better enforcer, but he’s just a different type of enforcer that plays by different rules, which is to say compromised ethics, transactional exchanges, and so on. Tech companies absolutely had a difficult time under Biden, but the way they played that game was with legal filings, with negotiations where they attempt to offer something they hope will improve the perception of competitive balance.
It’s just a difference in channeling these things through rule of law on the one hand and through transactional exchanges and gestures of fealty on the other.
And I think if you think the Trump style reflects a more effective approach to handling antitrust, it’s kind of telling on yourself in terms of being able to comprehend the value of one type of transaction, but not the other.
That’s some interesting perspective, I hadn’t thought of it that way. With Trump it’s really hard to know what is coming until it happens, but it’s nice that some people see a silver lining.
Nobody had to go kiss the ring they payed for his campaign because THEY WANTED to please him. Edit: Typo
Yeah but why they wanted to please him? What’s the benefit for them? Why they wouldn’t want to please previous administrations? The other user mentioned that Trump is very transactional, and that sounds quite right too.
Either way, look at Facebook, literally went through a shitstorm to align, that is a sign of weakness in my opinion.
What’s the benefit for them?
Not being targeted by a President.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/29/business/ceos-trump-revenge-nightcap/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/05/politics/trump-prosecute-political-opponents/index.html
Why they wouldn’t want to please previous administrations?
Those administrations weren’t targeting them.
I think it’s always about the money, plain and simple. If there is a threat to their gravy train, they will bend over backwards to keep it going. Otherwise, they don’t care about you.
OK, but then that was exactly my point. Antitrust is one way to target those companies, hence they had to suck up. Therefore them paying (peanuts in the grand scheme of things) could be seen as the exact opposite of “they are all in the same team”.
Right, I follow your take here as the one that makes the most sense. This makes a lot more sense as the tech companies attempting to head off a potentially adversarial relationship.
The Biden government was targeting them, though. Kind of. Various companies were facing challenges from the administration. I think the difference is: If they suck Trump’s dick enough he’ll leave them alone. Biden was less likely to do that. Or probably that’s their view of it, anyway. Somehow big business seems to view Trump as a “rational actor” while they view Biden as the opposite.
Something something TOS Mirror Universe episode…
These fuckers act like they’ve never heard of Lina Khan. Let’s see if Republicans try to replace her with someone with a stronger track record. Or, if they’re so serious about tech competition maybe they’ll get on board with net neutrality.
And look, I actually like Gail Slater (the Trump nominee that kicked off this thread). She’s got some bona fides, and I welcome Republicans taking antitrust more seriously, and rolling back the damage done by Robert Bork and his adherents (including and probably most significantly Ronald Reagan).
But to pretend that Democrats are less serious about antitrust than Republicans ignores the huge moves that the Biden administration have made in this area, including outside of big tech.
So we can say that Bork borked things up?
That is amazing. TIL!
By my lights your response is quite effective, and while I appreciate the modesty I think it’s appropriate to bring it over here:
Unfortunately, there’s a line beyond which it’s not okay to view a political party through one issue, and IMO the Republicans have crossed that line.
Privacy is a human rights issue. Republicans have signaled very strongly that they’re going to violate more human rights. It’s a net loss for privacy if that happens, even if big tech is a bit more restrained.
I’m sorry @protonprivacy, you’ve failed this test IMO. It would be one thing to say that given that the Republicans are in power, that Gail Slater is a good pick, but that’s not the stance you took.
The election already happened. Therefore it’s not a matter of picking. With regards of antitrust and big tech, Trump can do nothing, worse or better. In case of “better” there are indirect privacy wins. Everything else is completely unrelated, it’s not like the Trump administration will break up a monopoly every 3 other human rights he violates.
So what does it mean
Privacy is a human rights issue. Republicans have signaled very strongly that they’re going to violate more human rights. It’s a net loss for privacy if that happens, even if big tech is a bit more restrained.
If “big tech is not restrained” it’s going to be the same or worse, so why we wouldn’t be happy at least if that happens? I didn’t read a celebration of Trump as a win for human rights tout court, which could have prompted this response (I.e., hey, might be a win for privacy, but it’s a loss for x, y, z).
I’m having a lot of trouble parsing any of this.
In what sense does the election being over render it not a matter of picking? Slater’s selection is a nomination, you could select one person at the expense of another, to better or worse ends, so in any ordinary english language sense, there is indeed a pick.
By contrast, Lori Chavez-DeRemer was selected for labor secretary, which has been celebrated by people who are normally Trump critics. Because there are such things as better or worse picks.
With regards of antitrust and big tech, Trump can do nothing, worse or better.
Again: what? Trump gets to appoint the DoJ’s Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, Associate Attorney General, Solicitor General, 93 DoJ Attorneys, heads of a bunch of individual departments in the DoJ which each have hundreds of staff, and will likely appoint hundreds of new judges. Not only can Trump do something, his actions will be the single most dominating force determining the trajectory of anti-trust environment.
What’s more, as a commenter above noted, Lina Kahn is a perfect example of how influential these appointments can be, as we’ve seen some of the most ambitious anti-trust action in decades.
If “big tech is not restrained” it’s going to be the same or worse, so why we wouldn’t be happy at least if that happens?
They’re probably not even right, in the first instance, that big tech will be better restrained. The elephant in the room rendering this whole line of thinking preposterous, is Lina Khan’s extremely aggressive record on this won’t be matched even by a “good” Trump appointee, and in fact has been vehemently opposed by R’s through her whole tenure.
I didn’t read a celebration of Trump as a win for human rights tout court, which could have prompted this response
Right, but that’s the point. Nobody would credit Trump as a champion of human rights, which reveals why it’s so short-sighted to uphold him or R’s as leading lights on a topic such as privacy, which falls under the umbrella of a subject matter that we’re all agreeing he doesn’t care about.
It’s precisely because of the absence of consistent commitments on every other front that also belongs in the same category, that of human rights writ large, that it’s silly to celebrate the one exception to an otherwise negative record. And it’s hard to take statements seriously that treat that totality as if it embodies a pure commitment to virtues of an ideal, free and open internet.
Maybe I was too cryptic. The election being over means that we are not choosing trump for antitrust policy (or better, what he says he will do) and ignore the human rights violation. He is already going to be president, and those human rights violation will anyway happen. So why can’t we talk about the antitrust bit in isolation? It’s a separate area AND, we are not in election campaign, nobody will vote Trump because of his antitrust posture today, at the expense of the human rights.
With regards to the pick itself, I have no opinion. But I didn’t read a single piece that criticized the pick itself (which appeared to be OK?), almost every critique just highlighted that this pick happens in a specific context of shitty policies (project 2025 etc.). Which again, true, but in my opinion is forcing to expand the context. Once again, we are not in election campaign, nobody is proposing to be a single-issue voter on antitrust.
Not only can Trump do something, his actions will be the single most dominating force determining the trajectory of anti-trust environment
Sorry, I think my sentence was not clear. What I mean is that he can do “nothing”, " something good" (better) or “something bad” (worse). If his actions (or words) for now fall into the “something good” - this is anyway fully independent from all the “something bad” that he will surely do in many other areas, why can’t be discussed independently? Why it’s not possible to talk about this single issue? The rest is going to happen independently from what he does in the antitrust area, so isn’t still a net positive if here he does “something good”?
uphold him or R’s as leading lights on a topic such as privacy
But this also didn’t happen, and it’s also not logically true anyway. You could be a champion for privacy and at the same time - say - enact completely terrible policy on prisoners conditions (human rights). So in general it’s an absolutely arbitrary statement that gravitate towards a platitude. Specifically anyway, he has not been praised to be a champion for privacy, the benefit to privacy is indirect, and stems from a (possible) harder posture on tech monopolies. It was not even said that Trump does it for privacy as the end goal. Fully indirect effect. In fact, it’s also possible that trump might be harsher on monopolies and indirectly benefiting privacy of people by providing a fairer market where privacy companies can thrive, and at the same time a point some idiot that wants to backdoor encryption anywhere in some other position (another user mentioned this - which is a very good argument).
that it’s silly to celebrate the one exception to an otherwise negative record
I disagree with this based on the above (nobody said oh look what good champion of human rights Trump is because he will do something that indirectly may benefit privacy for everyone). In fact, I believe a few reasons of a previous record IN THIS AREA were cited by the guy (and later by the proton account). how good or solid examples I don’t know, but it was not all based just on a tweet with some propaganda.
Fuck, they are dumb and bad businessmen. What’s the reason still to chose their product over Tuta, Posteo, Mullvad? They have lost their unique selling point as at least pretending being a neutral instance providing private services. Plain stupidity.
“Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.”
That has to be one of the most retarded things I have ever read. You would have to ignore the last 50 years and have a lobotomy to believe that nonsense.
N.B. I originally went looking for a reason that maybe it was okay that Andy Yen was giving the thumbs up to Gail Slater. I thought this was an unfair internet pile-on. I think now it’s a fair internet pile-on.
EVERYONE! GET IN HERE!
Insane that an official company account posted this.
Seems like they have deleted it now. Link is dead. Has there been any further comment?
This is a lot worse look than Andy saying something on Twitter. It’s one thing for a board member to express an opinion as an individual, it’s another to have an explicit corporate position… I don’t even think the usual big tech suspects are this stupid to publicly support an administration like this.
That is somet nieve horseshit. Goddammit I don’t want to switch email providers again!
Aaaaaaaand it’s deleted.
Did they just remove their comments?
Let’s not get carried away. The scope of the comment is pretty narrow if you read it closely. This is one member of a 5-person board that also includes Tim Berners-Lee. The foundation structure is also a protection against abuses.
Yes you are right, and no you are not. It is concerning and something to stay vigilent about in the upcoming times.
Can’t you both be right? One it is a very narrow complement and also it be very concerning that the “small tech” is also bowing harder than big tech.
But this may be the price for not donating?
Let’s not get carried away. The scope of the comment is pretty narrow if you read it closely
The only thing I want to hear from you is that you actively disavow Trump, or if you feel this is going to hurt your business, at least say nothing at all. Anything other than that marks you as a shameless suck-up, and I want nothing to do with you or your business.
Ergo, I want nothing to do with Proton. It’s time suck-ups pay the price and see their bottom lines drop because of their dubious choices.
deleted by creator
I think the big difference is what the companies stand for.
If the CEO of The Anti-Spyware Company comes out in support of Spyware, is that not significantly worse than the CEO of The Spyware Company doing the same?
I supported The Anti-Spyware companies because of what they believed in. Now that is in question.
FWIW I don’t use Proton but switching to it was in my 2025 plans. Not so sure about that anymore…
Fastmail is pretty great :)
Thanks for the tip, I’ll check it out!
deleted by creator
All right then replace support of Spyware with “praise for The Spyware Company”
deleted by creator
Spyware was just an example? Proton is all about privacy and this board member is saying good things about a guy who doesn’t think us peasants should have any.
I agree that this isn’t the worst thing to ever happen. But I also agree with the people saying he shouldn’t have said anything.
I am good with computers but not good enough to roll my own entire email/calendar/cloud storage system
NextCloud is almost an “out of the box” experience for all of these.
deleted by creator
Nextcloud isnt end to end encrypted.
Between your machine, and a machine you control, via ssl?
if you disavow every company contributing to the republican party/trump you might as well sell all your belongs, and learn to live off grid. no internet access, no power, no retail.
we just dont live in a black and white world. its lovely shades of depressing grey gradients.
if you disavow every company contributing to the republican party/trump you might as well sell all your belongs, and learn to live off grid. no internet access, no power, no retail.
As much as possible, I will take my business to companies that aren’t openly terrible.
we just dont live in a black and white world
Tell that to the orange utan. He sure is about to turn the word from RGB to 1-pixel color space.
Do you really think I want to split people into people I can talk to vs. people I want to avoid at all costs? Trump is doing that. He’s forcing shitty choices on everybody. I’d rather have constructive and peaceful interaction with my fellow man. But can you honestly shake hands with a magard and not feel sick to your stomach? I can’t.
right, i agree the idea is revolting… but the old man at the dog park who only watches fox news isnt inherently evil. hes brainwashed. hes a fellow human who if shown the light would absolutely change his tune. to abandon those people is to abandon civilization.
sure thats not everyone, but its enough. we just need to show them the truth… that theyve been lied to and actually do have a choice.
treating every conservative voter as you would trump himself is absolutely painting in black and white.
but the old man at the dog park who only watches fox news isnt inherently evil
I’m sorry but no.
You have the die-hard racist MAGAs with the flags and the red cap. Those can fuck right off obviously.
But you also have all the ordinary folks who are NOT die-hard MAGA, but who decided that it was okay to vote for a convicted felon who tried to overthrow the government. And guess what: in a sense, they’re even worse.
Voting for Trump is crossing a line. If you voted for Trump, I really don’t want anything to do with you because you have proved to me that your sense of morality and your respect for the institutions of this country are compromised.
we just need to show them the truth
I once read this on lemmy and it stuck with me. I think it applies here:
The autistic trait that bites me in the ass most often is the unshakable belief that if I can just show someone the truth, they’ll believe me.
True for me, and worse, I never seem to learn.
Fuck, that’s just exactly me. It’s an autism trait??
More and more, I approach wishing everyone was autistic lmao
hes a fellow human who if shown the light would absolutely change his tune.
Thats not always true… That old man stuck on Fox News would likely rather shoot a bunch of brown people than admit he was wrong.
If I could live off grid I would. It’s not even an option. I’m forced to live like caged rat in a society that crushes my soul.
no internet access, no power, no retail.
Does this actually sound like a utopia to anyone else or just me?
Sure, there’s not always an option, but sometimes there is. My tiny bit of $ isn’t going to make or break a company, but i try to give it to places who donate less to the big orange turd. I’m in a constant struggle choosing among home Depot, lowes, and Ace hardware.
Just be aware that this is a peculiarly American take. In Europe at least, most people will agree that somebody’s opinions cannot somehow pollute whatever it is that they produce. Be it a traded good, or art, or in this case software.
Americans did not invent the idea of voting with their wallets. What a preposterous claim
The concept that wrong opinions are like a taint that rubs off on everything they touch is indeed pretty uniquely American (with some echos in the rest of the anglosphere). It explains much of the craziness and bitterness of US politics in recent years. It is absolutely not replicated in, for example, Catholic Europe.
Avoiding giving your money to companies that go against your politics isn’t some irrational “tainted” concept. Not sure why you’re insisting it is. It’s just not supporting things you don’t want to happen. These companies donate to and otherwise push forward bad policy. Also, still not sure where you got that Americans invented any of this, or how it would relate to the recent increase in polarization
This is a guy’s personal opinion about one aspect of a politician’s program. The only fact he mentions is just that, a fact. His insinuation that Democrats are supported by big business is also fairly defensible. There’s no obvious link to his company’s practices. The opinion is banal and widespread. You and a bunch of others here are treating this semi-non-story like some kind of religious heresy. I can tell you’re American just from that fact.
His insinuation that Democrats are supported by big business is also fairly defensible
The truth comes out. You think this is a “both sides” thing, and you agree with it.
No, what’s being said ITT is that he’s praising trump prematurely and people don’t want to support a business run by people who do that. Incredibly simple, and might I add, logical.
Idk in the rest of Europe, but in France I’ve witnessed the contrary a lot of times. I do however not have a study on a big enough sample to make a claim, this is all anecdotal evidence on my side.
Examples please. France is the classic example of a country where most people put the art before the artist. The partial exception, unsurprisingly, is younger people who are more plugged into the poisonous world of America’s culture wars.
This. Also, in Europe you can get internet, electricity, email from coops. There are even some “ethical banks” and some survivors from the 2008 (at least in Sapin) as “small savings rural banks” (cajas de ahorros).
And if you aren’t a rich progressist and can’t afford some expensive eco-bio-coop consume, there are 2d hand options, food recicling, stealing is easy enough (and nobody will shoot a bullet to you for this) and so on. So, yeah, off-the-grid is a legit option, but on-the-grid stealing electricity from huge power corps is super legit also. No need to go to the caves.
Even in case of no alternative (say, I must have an id and a cellphone number), this doesn’t justify anything from CEOs. Fun fact is, in the case of Proton, there is PLENTY of alternatives. So, let’s use all the colorful gradients instead of accepting to remain in a dark-gray scale
Even Michael Jackson?
Absolutely, yes. Great example. Great music. I guarantee you that almost everyone outside of the US-centric bit of the anglosphere agrees with me here.
Well, assuming they actually like music, of course.
It send a chill down my spine nonetheless
Yes. The “Trump was a good idea after all” take seems almost to be spreading like a meme at this point.
that also includes Tim Berners-Lee
You mean that traitorous piece of shit who sold us out to DRM on the Web?
Actually I ended up coming round to his view on this. If Firefox has stuck to its principles on DRM, then it would have been goodbye Firefox. And then you would have had no decent options at all, and neither would I. The setting is still opt-in.
Sometimes we have to compromise.
Taking the time to remove Google, embraced proton mail … Maybe it’s time to just write letters and send meme post cards.
Meme post cards are a great idea actually.
hand drawn, because of these fingerprinting yellow dots
Same here; but I’m switching to tuta
Sad. The way tech companies are changing stripes, we are about to hit a surveillance state by summer
I don’t understand how everyone can be so blind to the surveillance that already exists.
Literally all your communications or purchase or browsing history, 90% of people’s photos and contacts, everything you ever say near your phone/smart devices, your health data with devices like fitbit, cm resolution spy satelites, 4D maps of the entire globe being created via services like Pokemon Go, phones create and store in the cloud high resolution 3D maps of your face, mesh networked devices like Alexa now surveil without you even having internet access, your home and your exact location down to a meter are already being live spied on. Not to mention full remote access to all your devices.
Sometimes with a thin veneer of privacy on top of it, like Apple pretends to have.
Basically the only part of you that the surveillance state doesn’t constantly surveil already is your butthole.
Even avoiding just 10% of this surveillance in your daily life is almost impossible.
Soon smart toilets will also surveil your butthole.
It’s like people were born after Snowden’s leaks
deleted by creator
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, and that applies to tech. I pay for Proton and this is disappointing af but not shocking. Corporations and wannabe billionaires always fold to fascism.
Gonna start looking around at alternative email services to consider but I use my Proton email everywhere, so switching away is going to suck.
Ingl, I think the only way to stay sane these times is to ignore what they say and look at what they do. As long as his products are up to my standards and values, I’ll just ignore whatever he says to appease whomever
Agreed. If I haphazardly ditched services based on the opinions of tech folks, I’d be reduced to using a pair of cans attached with string and nothing else.
Were the cans and string ethically sourced, though?
I saved them from a landfill! They smell kinda weird though.
Yep… But CEOs bootlicking daddy trump is pathetic non the less…
What people define should not be doing is using Proton as one stop shop like they did with Google.
Got to stay nimble
Nonetheless is one word :)
I cannot think of a free VPN that doesn’t suck; does anyone has suggestions outside of Proton for that, please?
It is the spell check, trust me bro haha
Mullvad is is considered the gold standard but there is another that people recommend. Anybody can drop the other one?
no ethical consumption under capitalism
I agree with this as much as the next guy, but this is also kinda cope.
I take it as more of an observation and use it to be more mindful of what I buy, the services I use, etc. The reality is that we don’t know what happens behind the scenes with so much of this stuff, but we can still be conscious of it and use it as an opportunity to reduce clutter in our lives.
When you register a domain, you own the whole name-space of that domain:
All possible sub-domains of your domain are yours. All possible URLs on the domain are yours. All possible email addresses on the domain are yours.On your domain, you are also free to choose the linked services such as web, email calendar etc. If you are not satisfied with one provider, you are free to switch to another one at your own convenience.
This is the only answer that matters tbh
People somehow still surprised by Switzerland being neutral on Naziism
So Proton is out.
Sorry, I won’t trust a service that licks fascist boots.
Why does he think Trump is against big tech when he’s working side by side with Musk?
I see a lot of good discussion here. I’ve been on proton for years now, using my own domain. While true that Andy is one of 5 board members, and it’s a nonprofit etc, these statements are raising hairs on my neck, personally.
Does anyone have a good guide on problems associated with self-hosting email?
Been using their paid service for months. I have so many aliases. I’m just surprised. Surely this company knows its biggest user base has to be too educated to let this slide.
Very disappointing that this is the CEO and founder of Proton. I’ll be moving my stuff elsewhere and deleting my account this week.
Just canceled my subscription.
Where are you moving? I’m interested in alternatives to Proton Mail and Proton Drive
Mail I have sorted it out with Tuta and passwords with bitwarden.
Now I need a Drive alternative. Any suggestions?
Self-hosted Nextcloud?
Why can’t we have nice things?
I literally just switched over from Google a few months ago and finally got all settled in. Just great. Does anyone know of any good alternative? I know Tuta exists, are there other options?
