• ID411@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    8 months ago

    Quite the opposite.

    You’ve been triggered by very mild criticism of Proton and the small but nonetheless important risks associated with using that service.

    You have accused the user in question of doing crimes - it’s there in your comment for everyone to see. You are unable to accept that a firm that according to their own data, services 6000 requests for information under the Law, is a useful source of information for Law Enforcement.

    There’s no where for this conversation to go from here.

    • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      The fight against misinformation is an important one, and the misinformation you’re spreading is a threat to anyone who is interested in being privacy-conscious but doesn’t know enough to dispute what you’re saying. Whether or not the user was committing crimes, or any other non-state sanctioned activity that he recognized could land him in hot water continues to be irrelevant. Nobody is judging his morality, the point is that he knew what he was doing warranted more effort to maintain his privacy. You trying to put an emotional or moral spin on the term “crimes” is just more pedantic nonsense to distract from the issue at hand.

      The fact that Proton services 6,000 requests from law enforcement in a year (not all of which uncontested or even granted, a detail you’ve conveniently left out) does not imply that they’ve violated user trust, or that they’re doing anything they didn’t explicitly say they would do.

      Whatever your motivation is for this slander campaign against Proton, it isn’t working.