You’re defending him—intentionally or not—because you’re giving legitimacy to the idea that, somehow, the party that kicked him out is in the wrong.
Yeah, I am tired of this shit. My entire comment repeatedly spells out that criticizing one party does not mean supporting the other. Both FDO and Vaxry can be in the wrong. If you can’t even comprehend that, there is nothing else to talk about.
First off, I don’t know anything about Vaxry or the Hyperland community, so I am definitely not defending him or implying it is not bad or anything of the sorts. I am saying the public reasoning for the ban is manufactured BS, and I am pretty sure that is because it is hard to call yourself “free” anything if you want to police peoples behavior unrelated to your project.
If you think projects should do such policing, that’s fine. It even makes sense, if you ignore the potential for misuse. But they certainly shouldn’t advertise themselves as free. It’s the hypocrisy of trying to do both by manufacturing an excuse I am calling out.
As for the rest of what you write, I feel it all comes to the same unhinged idea that because someone is a bad person, everything they touch, create or any person engaging with them is also bad.
I dislike Brave, and it’s founder. Doesn’t mean everything Brave does is bad or can’t be promoted by me as good. If you choose to not do it for your personal beliefs, that is fine. But the idea that I am not allowed to praise Brave browser features or other actions because of something unrelated its founder did or said is ridiculous.
EDIT: Regarding your edit, yes. I criticize parts of DEI or stupid anti-Trump arguments. That’s the whole point. Stupid arguments are stupid even if a good person is making them and good arguments are good, even if evil person like Trump makes them. Parts of DEI can be bad, even though discrimination is also bad. The world is not black and white.
EDIT2: Here is my post on DEI if anyone wants to read it and decide for themselves whether it is reasonable criticism or not.
So it’s not just the PR, it is also him interacting with “the wrong people”. Because it is so unthinkable to post about another browser developer while developing a browser regardless of politics. Idk anything about Andreas Kling, maybe he is a bad person, but the reasoning in your comment seems unhinged to me.
PS: Maybe off topic, but FDO reasoning for banning Vaxry is also wild. FDO admits he never broke the CoC on their platforms, then the CoC enforcement sends him a threatening email demanding he moderates his community differently and when he pushes back and says he will ignore this person sending unsolicited threatening emails, that is a reason to ban him. Because somehow this unsolicited threatening email is somehow considered part of FDO. Literally manufacturing a cause…
“We don’t accept ideologically motivated changes” = White supremacist language… Yeah, sounds about like what I expected…
Yeah, we should just ditch email for sensitive communications.
Anyway, my point was that I lost trust in Proton back then over this and went to Tuta that has native clients. It makes no difference to my security since I don’t think I ever sent or received a single mail that was actually e2e encrypted. But Tuta’s more serious approach to e2ee made me slightly more confident in it as a company.
Now it kinda looks like it was the right choice.
doesn’t impact the security sufficiently to make a difference for the average user.
I think it is borderline. I am not advocating for PGP, I like the Signal model where you trust signal for introductions but have the ability to verify, even in retrospect. Trust but verify. Even a few advanced users verifying Signal keys forces Signal to remain honest or risk getting caught.
I think the lack of meaningful verification for proton is a significant security weakness, though average user probably has bigger things to worry about.
Bridge did not exist back then.
As for it being sophisticated attack, I think it is relative.
Regardless, if Proton said it did not matter to most people, I would respectfully disagree and move on. They did not. They claimed it is not at all less secure than a native app, which is BS.
It is nuanced, but having the ability to selectively serve malicious javascript stealing keys to specific people only on one access is considerable issue in practice, compared to distributing binary where you would generally have the same binary for everyone and you are able to archive and analyse it. Especially if you use third party distributions, like github releases or flatpaks.
Was it ever? I ditched them years ago when they tried to gaslight people that e2ee in javascript in browser is secure.
I don’t see any reason why you couldn’t with default settings. Beware of enabling any setting that stores data next to the media like nfo metadata storage, as those could maybe cause conflicts.
My bad, I thought it was about payments in general (including other programs) but it says social security database. Sorry.
Another accusation Elon made was that payments are going to people missing SSNs.
A much simpler answer is that not all Americans actually have an SSN. The Amish for example have religious objections towards insurance, so they were allowed to opt out from social security and therefore don’t get an SSN.
Asking if a very close relative to fascism is going to do mental gymnastics to somehow normalize even more fascism is neither new nor is it controversial.
I genuinely wonder what kind of echo chamber you would have to live in to think saying “normal right wing ideology is very close relative to fascism” is not controversial.
Then trying to steer the discussion towards the US democrats (still right wing from an objective position) is not only unproductive, it is obvious trolling.
I am not trying to steer the discussion. It is Satire. Showing people how stupid the argument is by applying the exact same logic the post uses to their own favourite party to make them think of the counterarguments on their own.
Just asking questions (also known as JAQing off, or as emojis: “🤔🤔🤔”[1]) is a way of attempting to make wild accusations acceptable (and hopefully not legally actionable) by framing them as questions rather than statements. It shifts the burden of proof to one’s opponent; rather than laboriously having to prove that all politicians are reptoid scum, one can pull out one single odd piece of evidence and force the opponent to explain why the evidence is wrong.
Which one fits this definition better? The original post that takes one single odd piece of evidence in the form of Musks controversial “Nazi salute” and asks questions about whether r/conservatives would support overt Nazism and even abandons the facade and answers its own questions by saying we should rename the subreddit?
Or my comment that is very clearly hypothetical and primarily intended to make fun of the original post (since I did not know the term “JAQing off” and I find it more fun to create a comment people either have to think about or hypocritically criticize for the thing they are doing themselves, instead of being a nerd and linking to obscure wikis about argumentation).
You are projecting my dude 🤣
JAQing off much?
As opposed to the post I am commenting on? :D
If you want to do a pointless hypothetical, at least make it ethically interesting.
What if Harris did the Natzi salute while shouting “Heil Hitler!” before the election? No change in policy or anything else.
Would you rather vote for Harris doing a Natzi salute or Trump doing Trump things? Words or actions? Or would you give up and not vote at that point?
I don’t want to convince you here, you do you.
But it seems funny to say that while you are using Linux, where almost nothing has official support.
I personally love that even if GoG shut down or otherwise was inaccessible, I would still have offline installers (that can be installed to wine manually). Obviously having a launcher is nicer, but I hate that there is no backup with Steam.
Not really. Sure, China is able to make unpopular decisions better then democracies, but that makes them inefficient in different directions. E.g. high speed rail in areas where it is not needed but greatly lacking freight trains. Or their housing bubble.