To add to the discussion we had some month ago, where some people said the planned laws would never come to be and would never be a threat: proton decided to differ and to move parts of the infrastructure to other countries.
To add to the discussion we had some month ago, where some people said the planned laws would never come to be and would never be a threat: proton decided to differ and to move parts of the infrastructure to other countries.
33 Comments
SierpinskiDreieck@feddit.org · 24 pts · 363d
It seems they take privacy serious, that is a good thing.
Also not a fan of their whole Trump thing, but if our whole plan is to pressure consumers to only buy from "good cooperations" we might as well just give up. That is a "US-liberal" form of protest, and utterly ineffective. Use what is easy, cheap and offers the protection you need and spend your energy on building something worthwhile.
Zwiebel@feddit.org · 12 pts · 363d
It irks me a little when someone asks where they should move to from gmail and the responses bash proton because the ceo made a shit take on twitter, like cmon. Some people really wanna be the enemy of good
Der_Mann_mit_Hut@feddit.org · 1 pts · 363d
The whole Trump thing is extremely embellished by some idiotic zealots who only want a PERFECTLY PURE product from PERFECTLY PURE and ideological exactly matching persons.
FarraigePlaisteach@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 363d
I’m losing track of who the good guys are. The most unethical e-mail companies involved in military or facisms in my view (and I’m no expert) are:
Gray area would be Proton until I find out what material advantage - if any / their Trump-supporting member provides to fascism in the U.S. and beyond.
Better options as I see them (again, I’m not an expert):
There’s a good breakdown of ethical option here: https://www.ethicalconsumer.org/technology/shopping-guide/ethical-email-providers
Zwiebel@feddit.org · 7 pts · 363d
Proton isn't perfect but it's worlds better than gmail. I'm content with using their free tier, but not convinced to pay for their expensive plans.
Here's another breakdown: https://www.privacyguides.org/en/email/
FarraigePlaisteach@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 363d
I think it's way better than Gmail too. But if even better options exist, then I'm gone at the first whiff of fascism, discrimination or military involvement. Making a choice on privacy alone is mostly for individualists, IMO. Individualism is what got is into this mess in the first place.
huppakee@feddit.nl · 1 pts · 363d
I got Mail plus with a discount, it's their only service I really use anyway. Don't think I actually made use of it. Registered some aliasses since I could, but don't use them so +1 from me.
Zwiebel@feddit.org · 2 pts · 361d
The discount is only for one year isn't it? You're gonna pay full price after that
huppakee@feddit.nl · 1 pts · 361d
Yes, if my discounted year would end today I would not renew it. Back then I thought I might want to upgrade to the full plan after a year but now I've come to think it might be better to get these services from a bunch of different companies instead of one all-inclusive package. Maybe I'll takr the effort and switch to Tuta mail. Or maybe I'll just downgrade back to the free plan. Not sure yet.
Zwiebel@feddit.org · 1 pts · 360d
You probably have to cancel a month in advance before it auto renews
SrMono@feddit.org · 7 pts · 363d
Love my mailbox.org
CubitOom@infosec.pub · 2 pts · 363d
Proton Mail Says It’s “Politically Neutral” While Praising Republican Party The “privacy-first” company surprised its user base when CEO Andy Yen lauded Trump on social media.
sanpo@sopuli.xyz · 23 pts · 363d
Would you people stop with that?
Yes, they fucked up. They're far from perfect.
They're still far better option than Google and Microsoft.
gmtom@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 363d
Calling praising fascists a "fuck up" is not a good look.
How about we support companies that dont support facists at all?
CubitOom@infosec.pub · 1 pts · 363d
I'd rather host myself then use their services.
Saleh@feddit.org · 33 pts · 363d
It is nice that you have the abilities, infrastructure and time to do that. Most people don't.
I sometimes bake my own bread. But i know that this is not an option for most people, so bakeries are needed.
CubitOom@infosec.pub · 5 pts · 363d
Well obviously it would be better to have more options of companies to choose from that protect my privacy and support my values.
However, this is the point of a boycott. One might think that would be the spirit of this community.
There are other email providers, some that don't support fascists.
jagermo@feddit.org · 13 pts · 363d
Running your own mail? Good luck
lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world · -8 pts · 363d
Thank you! I want my data to go directly to Putin, not through some google middleman!
Zwiebel@feddit.org · -1 pts · 363d
Most facts-based commentor on Lemmy
SrMono@feddit.org · 13 pts · 363d
Yea, we had some discussions about that, but that isn't the point.
A known player moving its IT due to changes in law is the point.
CubitOom@infosec.pub · -4 pts · 363d
This is more or less an ad for a company with a CEO that has a pro-fascist agenda.
If the point was to illustrate something about laws in Switzerland then that should have been the subject of the article.
Saleh@feddit.org · 5 pts · 363d
....
The article both explains the concerns of the effect of the law to move large parts of its infrastructure outside of Switzerland as well as it explains the law and its consequences.
How is that an ad for the company? Should there be no articles about the economic consequences of Switzerland's planned mass surveillance, to avoid risking that companies could be presented positively for reacting to such laws?
Der_Mann_mit_Hut@feddit.org · 3 pts · 363d
This utterly moronic take is so much a danger to the security of the average user that i am now at a point where i accuse anyone using it to be a malignant actor.
CubitOom@infosec.pub · 4 pts · 363d
I won't support companies that fund, or praise fascists.
If that makes me malignant then I don't want to be benign.
If I am ill-informed, then it shouldn't be hard for the claims in the article to be disputed.
lIlIlIlIlIlIl@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 363d
Finally people are starting to wake up to this bullshit. They are not to be trusted
MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 363d
hubobes@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 363d
Still not a law...
SrMono@feddit.org · 2 pts · 363d
Yet enough fuzz to influence company decisions.
peacepath@lemmy.world · -1 pts · 363d
SrMono@feddit.org · 4 pts · 363d
I changed the title from “to other EU countries” to “to EU countries”.
peacepath@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 363d
thanks :p
SrMono@feddit.org · 1 pts · 363d
It was a little hard to grasp what you were aiming at 😅
AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 363d
Authors for the most part are not the ones writing the titles for their articles.
george@feddit.org · 1 pts · 363d
What are you talking about?