• 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 5 months ago
cake
Cake day: April 4th, 2025

help-circle
  • It appears that I was mistaken. After looking through Mullvad’s documentation, it truly appears that it has really good fingerprinting protection.

    The downsides I see with Mullvad Browser:

    1. it makes a lot of automatic connections on startup (which Pale Moon does not (with some caveats));
    2. the choice of uBlock Origin and NoScript over the superior uMatrix is also a bit of a disappointment;
    3. it forces pointless DoH when the same privacy effect could be achieved for cheaper (resource wise) with just configuring your local resolver.

    Sure, you could argue that these automatic connections are necessary and they are to trusted sites but you are still dealing with telemetry which should be disabled by default.

    Nevertheless thank you for enlightening me. I will definetly now try out Mullvad Browser to replace Arkened Firefox.


  • Many people say that SimpleX is not ready to replace the likes of Whatsapp, Telegram and Signal yet but noone specifies exactly what features are missing.

    I get that public key cryptography is confusing for the average people but there is no UI fix that is getting around that obstacle if we want people to make informed choices on what platform/protocol to use for communications.

    The same thing applies to decentralization - people just need to understand that the trade-off they’re making for communications’ resilience is the comfort of an online addressbook.

    Although I admit that there are certain UI elements that could be made better (for example the nickname setting could be stylized a bit better so people can more easily change the names of their contacts to something more familiar), most criticism towards SimpleX comes from people being a bit lazy and not reading the manual before using the app.

    TL;DR: I don’t understand what features are missing from SimpleX.







  • Your argument is, correct me if I’m wrong, that the demand for product X always necessetates its production/supply and that supply will cease when there is no more demand.

    A valid argument based on basic market economic principles.

    I argue that there are times, when the demand for something does not outweigh the cost incurred (by the society) from the production and supply of a product. Meaning there are cases, such as this one, when it is almost impossible to decrease demand and thus influence the production which in turn would decrease the cost incurred by the society. In my view, the State has to protect foremost its citizenry, not ginormous enterprises. If this protection means going against “market forces”, then so be it.

    Both “products” cause harm to society while only a few benefit, so no, it was not a false equivalence.

    But then again, I could be mistaken and feel free to correct me on anything. :))




  • machiavellian@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlO no! Not the nazisss
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    1 month ago

    If this isn’t a trollpost and your not getting paid for it, then I’m just baffled on how wrong someone can be regarding generic historical facts. Aside from the idea itself, that it is somehow normal and even commendable to assist foreign states against enemies without them requesting it, all the while criticizing the US for similar actions, your opinion ignores the whole Molotov-Ribbentrop secret pact.

    And for argument’s sake, let’s just pretend, that Soviets were of kind heart and mind and truly wanted to help and protect the Polish people from the horrifing Nazis they so clearly detested. Then why did they host a joint parade in Brest-Litovsk after having conquered Poland?? Or better yet, why did they mercilessly execute 20 000 officers in the woods of Katyn? Not to mention the fact that the Warsaw Uprising failed because the Soviets deliberatly waited for all future dissidents to be killed off, before “liberating” it.