Skip to content

“No Apple tax means we will lower prices” - Proton announces lower prices for users by up to 30% after US ruling against Apple fees

Technology
55 32 0
  • Do he still think fascism is good for small businesses though?

    Why is it bad though? This business is in no form related to politics. It wouldn't change fundamentally even if Hitler ran it.

  • Why is it bad though? This business is in no form related to politics. It wouldn't change fundamentally even if Hitler ran it.

    I’m not going to willingly put my money towards someone who supports that kind of thing. The first response to my comment was a very level headed response and provided evidence that he does not directly support the administration.

    Still doesn’t provide me a lot of consumer confidence though.

  • I am sad because of all the people in this thread who think the CEO is "fascist-sympathetic" because he said Trump did something better than the Democrats one time.

    Absolutely agreed. I think when you have such role in a company you should avoid making political statements at all, because no matter what you say you will end up upsetting some people. In this case, "try-hard" democrats.

  • I'd use their VPN even if Hitler owns it. It's private, secure and they stand to their values with respect to that. Why would I care about political views? Politics don't change the service on a technical level. Literally don't give a shit.

    Except politics, actually, can change the service. For example, surrendering data in secret. Or installing backdoors.

    Not that I think Proton is gonna do that (or at least hope so), but thinking "why would I care about politics, they don't affect the app on a technical level" is incredibly naive and potentially incorrect.

    With an over-the-top example, it's kinda like saying "why should I care about the politics of my landlord after they support the "Increase Tenant's Rent" party, it doesn't change the service"

  • Absolutely agreed. I think when you have such role in a company you should avoid making political statements at all, because no matter what you say you will end up upsetting some people. In this case, "try-hard" democrats.

    Well, it's worth leveraging your status to communicate to the politicians (i.e. this tweet). In this case, it cost him more than I think he was expecting.

  • Except politics, actually, can change the service. For example, surrendering data in secret. Or installing backdoors.

    Not that I think Proton is gonna do that (or at least hope so), but thinking "why would I care about politics, they don't affect the app on a technical level" is incredibly naive and potentially incorrect.

    With an over-the-top example, it's kinda like saying "why should I care about the politics of my landlord after they support the "Increase Tenant's Rent" party, it doesn't change the service"

    If your threat model depends of political idiologies then you should reconsider your threat model.

  • I’m not going to willingly put my money towards someone who supports that kind of thing. The first response to my comment was a very level headed response and provided evidence that he does not directly support the administration.

    Still doesn’t provide me a lot of consumer confidence though.

    Maybe you should reconsider your threat model. You seem to be very light on information. If political views is an issue than you're the issue.

  • I am sad because of all the people in this thread who think the CEO is "fascist-sympathetic" because he said Trump did something better than the Democrats one time.

    Yeah, having only just switched from GMail to Proton last week my heart sank when I saw “Proton are MAGA”.

    Then I spent three minutes reading up on it and it’s like, the CEO said one thing about policy on regulation of big tech that was critical of the Democrats for not doing enough, and the internet has decided that means he’s MAGA.

  • Damn. People here sure love purity testing. The guy could pay for their cancer treatment and still slap him every chance because they got it wrong publicly in the past but once you get it wrong publicly once, you're out of the club. Go be a conservative we don't want you. When someone at Tuta has a bad year and ends up in the wrong publicly, find another email service to try and convince people to go too. Probably worse in functionality than Tuta as you go down to smaller and worse funded efforts in this niche field of Internet activism

    But people here do it here too to Mozilla because they don't like their social outreach programs and their attempts to get advertising revenue so screw Mozilla too. So because nothing but perfection is acceptable, push away people that may be adjacent/left leaning right and switch to less developed products. Switch from Firefox and attack Mozilla who do the bulk of Firefox development and use Waterfox who do a custom deployment/build. Pure display of perfection being the enemy of good here.

    You want people to embrace privacy but keep whiplashing people around when the org/anyone in leadership says something wrong. Screw Signal, they're not perfect. Screw Matrix/Element, some developer said something one day so it's all bad. I'm surprised anyone here uses any privacy software or a major open source software like Linux or Krita or Blender at the risk that someone in the background may be wrong in someway which I am 100% certain they exist in important positions. Same with Lemmy

    Go back to the 60s and you all would be shitting on Fred Hampton for accepting the impure and the color coalition for everyone that had ever said something wrong. Al Franken definitely would not make it with y'all. Y'all can't build up leftist communities because y'all are bitter assholes that can't move on and spend so much time purity testing. Y'all are probably mediocre too so can't make a difference in privacy and data ownership activism anyways so should be lining up to support not just Tuta, someone hasn't screwed up publicly yet, and Proton

    Reminds me of Aung San Suu Kyi. She was under the gun of the military ruling class that permitted limited democratic government and because she didn't make speech as if she lived in the US, a bunch of Americans turned on her and celebrated when the military dictatorship came back to rule and put her in prison the moment it seemed like the civilian government would actually assert more power

    It's not a purity test so much as a fear that publicly signaling loyalty to trump devalued their trustworthiness as private and secure. If their CEO legitimately believes that Republicans are better on tech policy than democrats because conservatives want to weaponize the federal government to control speech online, then I don't really trust him not to cooperate with federal authorities when they want to access someone's emails or vpn traffic. Conservatives are simply not trustworthy to me

  • Yeah, having only just switched from GMail to Proton last week my heart sank when I saw “Proton are MAGA”.

    Then I spent three minutes reading up on it and it’s like, the CEO said one thing about policy on regulation of big tech that was critical of the Democrats for not doing enough, and the internet has decided that means he’s MAGA.

    He said Republicans are better on tech policy than democrats. Republicans tech policy is motivated entirely by the fact that their racist and conspiratorial views were getting them banned on social media sites from 2015 - 2024

    Conservatives have absolutely zero principles. If they say they want to break up big tech, it's because they want to control it in some way. They want the platforms to promote speech that's beneficial to them.

    If you believe that Republicans truly are better for tech policy than democrats, then you either whole-heartedly agree that a group of criminals and wannabe dictators should be able to destroy any business that publishes speech against them, or you are extremely gullible. Either way, why would I want to give you my business?

  • Their CEO approved of an appointment Trump made, and criticized Dem on the issue -- doesn't make him a Trump supporter. If we can't tell the Dems off when we think the GOP does better, how can we proceed?

    People aren't criticizing him because he criticized the democrats. Liberals and leftists are pretty unhappy with the DNC right now, too. Anybody can criticize the democrats all day if they want, thats not forbidden.

    They're criticizing him because the things he said are actually fucking braindead retarded.

  • It's not a purity test so much as a fear that publicly signaling loyalty to trump devalued their trustworthiness as private and secure. If their CEO legitimately believes that Republicans are better on tech policy than democrats because conservatives want to weaponize the federal government to control speech online, then I don't really trust him not to cooperate with federal authorities when they want to access someone's emails or vpn traffic. Conservatives are simply not trustworthy to me

    This is literally just insane rambling. You need serious media literacy.

  • If your threat model depends of political idiologies then you should reconsider your threat model.

    If a person signals loyalty to a criminal government which is violating the rights of its people daily, why would I trust them not to cooperate with that government when they ask for a backdoor to be installed? Conservatives are simply not trustworthy. They're lying, backstabbing, and manipulative. They have no principles at all and will say or do anything to acquire more power and money

  • It's not a purity test so much as a fear that publicly signaling loyalty to trump devalued their trustworthiness as private and secure. If their CEO legitimately believes that Republicans are better on tech policy than democrats because conservatives want to weaponize the federal government to control speech online, then I don't really trust him not to cooperate with federal authorities when they want to access someone's emails or vpn traffic. Conservatives are simply not trustworthy to me

    This. It's amazing how naive people here can be just because they fanboyed some random CEO before they were revealed to be problematic.

  • This is literally just insane rambling. You need serious media literacy.

    Tell me why I'm wrong

  • Here comes the Steam defenders.

    I have many issues with the gamer deference to the steam monopoly... But they don't partake in this particular abuse: taking a cut from the dev for all in game purchases. They only take a (sizeable) cut for the initial game purchase.

  • Tell me why I'm wrong

    The premise is already wrong.
    There was no promise or loyalty, not even close.

  • The premise is already wrong.
    There was no promise or loyalty, not even close.

    He endorsed the republican party. He said we should clean house of democrats. Is that not declaring party loyalty? It was also a completely unnecessary comment, in response to nothing. It was shortly after Trump's election when every CEO went out of their way to kowtow to the new regime. Its transparently a loyalty pledge to the new boss

  • Why? Idiots thinking they know more than they do won't be stopped by this. Also if we wanted to round humanities and liberal arts by making it mandatory to pass analysis, linear algebra, organic chemistry and classical physics would just lead to much more people not graduating anything.

    School is for a general education. Academia is for specialization.

    I can only speak for myself... But I had 2+ years at university before declaring a (STEM) major, allowing me to take courses in political science, history, etc.

    So, as someone with a STEM degree, in a field of specialists who have zero understanding of the real world outside of their field, the difference is instantly recognizable.

    The idea that a more well rounded education can ever be a bad thing is just straight up ignorant and it comes off as some sort of insecurity on your part.

  • Andy Yen went out of his way to criticize Democrats on antitrust, which is how you can tell it's actually a pro-Trump position unsupported by the actual facts.

    I like Gail Slater. She's possibly the best choice among people who Trump likes, to head DOJ's Antitrust Division. She has bipartisan bona fides.

    But to say that Democrats, after 4 years of Lina Khan leading the FTC, and a bunch of the reforms that the Biden FTC and DOJ made to merger standards and their willingness to sue/seek big penalties for antitrust violations, aren't more serious than Republicans about reining in big tech consolidation and about stronger enforcement of antitrust principles, completely flips around the history and is a bad faith argument.

    Andy Yen could've praised Gail Slater, and that would be that. Instead, he took a post by Trump that didn't even mention Democrats, and made it about how the Democrats are bad on taking on big tech. That's the problem everyone had with it.

    Andy praised Gail Slater publicly, and they even worked together.

  • 870 Stimmen
    72 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    J
    I think you're mistaken -- there are a large number of people who vehemently dislike it, why is probably why you think that.
  • 512 Stimmen
    54 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    E
    My cousin partially set his bedroom on fire doing something very similar with the foil from chewing gum. This was in the 1980s though so no one really cared, I'm pretty sure he just got shouted at.
  • Microsoft Bans Employees From Using DeepSeek App

    Technology technology
    11
    1
    122 Stimmen
    11 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    L
    (Premise - suppose I accept that there is such a definable thing as capitalism) I'm not sure why you feel the need to state this in a discussion that already assumes it as a necessary precondition of, but, uh, you do you. People blaming capitalism for everything then build a country that imports grain, while before them and after them it’s among the largest exporters on the planet (if we combine Russia and Ukraine for the “after” metric, no pun intended). ...what? What does this have to do with literally anything, much less my comment about innovation/competition? Even setting aside the wild-assed assumptions you're making about me criticizing capitalism means I 'blame [it] for everything', this tirade you've launched into, presumably about Ukraine and the USSR, has no bearing on anything even tangentially related to this conversation. People praising capitalism create conditions in which there’s no reason to praise it. Like, it’s competitive - they kill competitiveness with patents, IP, very complex legal systems. It’s self-regulating and self-optimizing - they make regulations and do bailouts preventing sick companies from dying, make laws after their interests, then reactively make regulations to make conditions with them existing bearable, which have a side effect of killing smaller companies. Please allow me to reiterate: ...what? Capitalists didn't build literally any of those things, governments did, and capitalists have been trying to escape, subvert, or dismantle those systems at every turn, so this... vain, confusing attempt to pin a medal on capitalism's chest for restraining itself is not only wrong, it fails to understand basic facts about history. It's the opposite of self-regulating because it actively seeks to dismantle regulations (environmental, labor, wage, etc), and the only thing it optimizes for is the wealth of oligarchs, and maybe if they're lucky, there will be a few crumbs left over for their simps. That’s the problem, both “socialist” and “capitalist” ideal systems ignore ape power dynamics. I'm going to go ahead an assume that 'the problem' has more to do with assuming that complex interacting systems can be simplified to 'ape (or any other animal's) power dynamics' than with failing to let the richest people just do whatever they want. Such systems should be designed on top of the fact that jungle law is always allowed So we should just be cool with everybody being poor so Jeff Bezos or whoever can upgrade his megayacht to a gigayacht or whatever? Let me say this in the politest way I know how: LOL no. Also, do you remember when I said this? ‘Won’t someone please think of the billionaires’ is wearing kinda thin You know, right before you went on this very long-winded, surreal, barely-coherent ramble? Did you imagine I would be convinced by literally any of it when all it amounts to is one giant, extraneous, tedious equivalent of 'Won't someone please think of the billionaires?' Simp harder and I bet maybe you can get a crumb or two yourself.
  • 326 Stimmen
    20 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    roofuskit@lemmy.worldR
    It's extremely traceable. There is a literal public ledger if every single transaction.
  • 298 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    kolanaki@pawb.socialK
    Internet access should be a utility like electricity and water until all three, along with housing, medicine, and food, can be free to all.
  • 551 Stimmen
    26 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    S
    100% agreed. Here's a relevant Louis Rossmann video where a US Senator (Ron Wyden) officially asked the FTC to look into issues like this. I sincerely hope something comes out of this.
  • Reddit will tighten verification to keep out human-like AI bots

    Technology technology
    21
    1
    83 Stimmen
    21 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    R
    Started banning everyone who says mean things about Tesla and musk. Banned whole subreddits for him. Edit: oh it’s fucking you, of course it fucking is. How much they paying you?
  • Microsoft's AI Secretly Copying All Your Private Messages

    Technology technology
    4
    1
    0 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    0 Aufrufe
    S
    Forgive me for not explaining better. Here are the terms potentially needing explanation. Provisioning in this case is initial system setup, the kind of stuff you would do manually after a fresh install, but usually implies a regimented and repeatable process. Virtual Machine (VM) snapshots are like a save state in a game, and are often used to reset a virtual machine to a particular known-working condition. Preboot Execution Environment (PXE, aka ‘network boot’) is a network adapter feature that lets you boot a physical machine from a hosted network image rather than the usual installation on locally attached storage. It’s probably tucked away in your BIOS settings, but many computers have the feature since it’s a common requirement in commercial deployments. As with the VM snapshot described above, a PXE image is typically a known-working state that resets on each boot. Non-virtualized means not using hardware virtualization, and I meant specifically not running inside a virtual machine. Local-only means without a network or just not booting from a network-hosted image. Telemetry refers to data collecting functionality. Most software has it. Windows has a lot. Telemetry isn’t necessarily bad since it can, for example, help reveal and resolve bugs and usability problems, but it is easily (and has often been) abused by data-hungry corporations like MS, so disabling it is an advisable precaution. MS = Microsoft OSS = Open Source Software Group policies are administrative settings in Windows that control standards (for stuff like security, power management, licensing, file system and settings access, etc.) for user groups on a machine or network. Most users stick with the defaults but you can edit these yourself for a greater degree of control. Docker lets you run software inside “containers” to isolate them from the rest of the environment, exposing and/or virtualizing just the resources they need to run, and Compose is a related tool for defining one or more of these containers, how they interact, etc. To my knowledge there is no one-to-one equivalent for Windows. Obviously, many of these concepts relate to IT work, as are the use-cases I had in mind, but the software is simple enough for the average user if you just pick one of the premade playbooks. (The Atlas playbook is popular among gamers, for example.) Edit: added explanations for docker and telemetry