- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- privacy@lemmy.world
Unnecessary and deeply concerning bow to the new “king”
Update: position got backed up by an official Proton post on Mastodon, it’s an official Proton statement now. https://mastodon.social/@protonprivacy/113833073219145503
Update 2, plot-twist: they removed this response from Mastodon - seems they realize it exploded into their face!
You must log in or register to comment.
Oh, goddammit.
The writing was on the wall for proton for a while now
No it hasn’t. Back this claim up with some evidence
I wouldn’t call it “writing on the wall,” but they have done some not-so-good things over the last few years:
- Handing over data for their email services (which was legally required) (ref).
- Releasing a Bitcoin wallet. The problem for me is that Bitcoin is inherently not private.
- Lying in marketing. Proton claims “no data or speed limits” for their free VPN (ref), which is just plain wrong. If you download a few gigs, it will slow you down to a few Mbit (if I remember correctly). I even contacted their support about this, and they just said, “They are balancing the servers for the free VPN.” But then why was it fast in the beginning, and if I reconnected to the same server, would it be fast again. Just to be clear: I have no problem with the speed limit/balancing itself, just that they are lying about it.
- Proton incentivizing free email accounts to connect to a Gmail account to get 500 MB more storage. (You need to go through the “tutorial” steps to get the 500 MB extra, and one of them is to have a Google Mail account send all their emails to your new Proton inbox.)
This is why I personally decided against Proton.
These are useful data for making decisions about using their service, but not exactly indicative of support for a right wing authoritarian leader who lies more in one day than he has hairs on his entire body.
Edit: typo
Mostly true, that’s why I opened with “I wouldn’t call it writing on the wall.” But for me, it shows that they are not as privacy- and consumer-focused as they like to present themselves. Supporting Trump is just five steps further in this direction. (That’s just how I feel about it.)
that’s why I opened with “I wouldn’t call it writing on the wall.”
Damn; you’re right. My bad. I somehow missed your opener saying exactly the opposite of what you were saying.
Everything you said is true and verifiable, and worth considering when you decide which service to use. It’s a lot of reasons to favor the .onion/tor version of their service to limit what they have access to depending on your privacy stance.
They are indicative of opportunism and greed, which is exactly in line with preemptively sucking up to a future dictator.
Woah… an actually rock-solid account of problems with Proton! Nicely done.
This contrasts with the incoherent conspiracy theory spaghetti that has sometimes been trotted out to make the case against them.
This is interesting. I’m current using btguard, but was thinking about other vpn providers. I have a free protonmail email account and was wondering about their vpn service. Sounds like they are not so privacy oriented. And I assume NordVPN is a similar story?
Well, I’d say Proton is still better than most other options (open-source software, no ad trackers on the website and in apps). However, specifically for VPNs, I would recommend Mullvad or IVPN. If you are a bit more tech-savvy, you may also take a look at Cryptostorm. Of all three, only Mullvad is police-raid-proven to not store logs or other PII. The most important thing for me personally would be that the VPN company is not owned by a larger parent company, which in turn owns multiple different VPN providers. This alone excludes a lot of the heavily advertised providers (Private Internet Access, NordVPN, Surfshark, ExpressVPN, CyberGhost, OVPN, and probably a few more).
What did you go with out of curiosity?
Drive - Selfhosted Nextcloud
Email - Posteo/Tuta
VPN - Cryptostorm (IVPN/Mullvad are more user friendly)
Passwords - Keepass (Sync over my Nextcloud.)
Yea! I’m interested, I did not see that coming…
They’ve been cooperating with law enforcement and handing data to the cops proactively since 2021.
Pay attention.
What do you mean with “proactively”?
And then we have the communists making Lemmy. Is there any moderate developers lol. Valve is the only big company I can think of that isn’t annoying. All the faceless Linux devs are good too
Glances at the child gambling enabled by the steam marketplace, an issue being blatantly ignored by Valve leadership.
Buddy, I don’t know how to tell you this. I love Valve for all the good they do, but they got some serious skeletons, too.
Valve representatives were asked point blank if the third party gambling sites have a positive influence on their bottom line, and the dude replying sweated bullets for several seconds before nervously going “we… don’t have any data on that” while the rest stared daggers at him.
Coffeezilla has a recent video on the situation.
Link to whatever you’re talking about?
The timestamp in the coffeezilla video.
Watch the whole thing for more detail.
I love Steam, but thinking about switching to gog over this. Anybody have any ideas how we can let valve know this isn’t okay?
I did this years ago and have like 500 games on GOG. Ended up going back to Steam due to features that gog just doesn’t have. Sigh.
I have a feeling I would feel the same. Its nice having everything in one place. What was missing for you?
All the social features, the workshop, easy browsing, and guides just off the top of my head. GOG is still good for those really retro 90s and early 2000s games though
If it’s between fascism and communism, the answer is pretty fucking simple imo. Only one of those ideologies considers all people to be equal.
And no, I am not a communist, and I would not choose communism unless it was the only alternative to fascism.
I fear for what will happen to valve when Gabr step down in the future
I have a bigger fear of what happens to Linux when Torvalds retires. He took a break a while back, and it was an absolute shit show of a power struggle.
fuck off booooooot licker
The fuck are you on about?
Standing up for the little guy. Huh. Is that why billionaires and CEO are throwing literal tens of millions at Trump? Why he staffed his cabinet with billionaires? Why the center of his policy is tax cuts for the giga wealthy, at the expense of everyone else and the national debt, at a time where wealth inequality is literally tearing the country apart?
https://www.axios.com/2025/01/15/trump-windfall-fundraising-500-million
https://www.axios.com/2024/12/09/trump-wealth-cabinet-politicians-billionaires
These are objective, public facts. Like, I’m way more conservative than Lemmy’s center and willing acknowledge any good Trump does, but what reality is this guy living in? Who is this statement for? Who the heck does he think is using Proton services? He just pissed off his employees and customers for… What?
Probably doesn’t want to get banned in the US… Or so my copium tells me.
Silver lining is that Proton is owned by a non-profit.
I was thinking this for a second, but is this really plausible? Normally when we talk about corporations we talk about how powerful they are and how they use different nations to locate headquarters and offices in order to mitigate legal and tax obligations. We regularly talk about how governments can’t reign them in and how they act with impunity.
But now? “They HAVE to capitulate. They are just doing it to survive.” Really? Do we really believe that? Or is it more likely that this is what they want and if they didn’t, they’d be fighting tooth and nail to stop it? I’m with the second option honestly.
That’s what I don’t get. If the proton CEO was actually raging MAGA, the last thing he should do, strategically, is stoke fires by stirring this up. That’s business 101.
…He must want conservative’s ears for some kind of policy issue, maybe to the detriment of Proton’s competitors. But what?
OpenAI has taught me that the non-profit stuff is meaningless.
OK let me add fuel to the fire. here in Andy’s response he says the tweet was from last year which is technically true but it was from December 2024.
Also how can he think that Trump stands for little guys when he has elon musk as his pet monkey
I actually thinknit’s the other way round but anyway.
Oh FFS, and here I was recently considering switching to ProtonMail… fuck the fuck off.
Dear CEOs: if you’re eager to suck dick, I’m sure you can find someone better than authoritarian shitheads. Have some fucking standards.
The official @protonprivacy@mastodon.social account replied and doubled down
protonprivacy@mastodon.social - @jonah
Corporate capture of Dems is real. In 2022, we campaigned extensively in the US for anti-trust legislation.
Two bills were ready, with bipartisan support. Chuck Schumer (who coincidently has two daughters working as big tech lobbyists) refused to bring the bills for a vote.
At a 2024 event covering antitrust remedies, out of all the invited senators, just a single one showed up - JD Vance.
1/2
protonprivacy@mastodon.social - @jonah By working on the front lines of many policy issues, we have seen the shift between Dems and Republicans over the past decade first hand.
Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost.
Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.
2/2
(Less importantly, my response)
So sounds like their main concern is addressing the abuses of the FAANG monopolies, and only a Republican has talked to them about it.
I guess that is understandable in that very narrow lens, but it’s a bit laughable considering how all the big tech companies are also cozying up to the Trump administration. All this has done for me is make me wary of anything Proton does now.
Actually I disagree on the latest part. I actually questioned, why google and Facebook had to go kiss the ring and pay some bucks to Trump, and didn’t have to do that before? This for me is a sign of a disalignment between big tech and the administration.
That said, it’s very much possible (I would say likely) trump won’t do shit and he just happens to have the “correct” position on this particular issue because it can be used to attack the Californian elite (I.e. dem elite). But it’s a matter of fact that it’s auspicable he will follow up with action on his words on this, even if for the wrong reasons.
Its more that trump is very transactional. He couldnt give to shit if corpations are fleecing people so as long he gets a peice. Its like businesses paying the mafia for “protection”.
Exactly this. It’s not necessarily that he’s like a better enforcer, but he’s just a different type of enforcer that plays by different rules, which is to say compromised ethics, transactional exchanges, and so on. Tech companies absolutely had a difficult time under Biden, but the way they played that game was with legal filings, with negotiations where they attempt to offer something they hope will improve the perception of competitive balance.
It’s just a difference in channeling these things through rule of law on the one hand and through transactional exchanges and gestures of fealty on the other.
And I think if you think the Trump style reflects a more effective approach to handling antitrust, it’s kind of telling on yourself in terms of being able to comprehend the value of one type of transaction, but not the other.
That’s some interesting perspective, I hadn’t thought of it that way. With Trump it’s really hard to know what is coming until it happens, but it’s nice that some people see a silver lining.
Nobody had to go kiss the ring they payed for his campaign because THEY WANTED to please him. Edit: Typo
Yeah but why they wanted to please him? What’s the benefit for them? Why they wouldn’t want to please previous administrations? The other user mentioned that Trump is very transactional, and that sounds quite right too.
Either way, look at Facebook, literally went through a shitstorm to align, that is a sign of weakness in my opinion.
What’s the benefit for them?
Not being targeted by a President.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/10/29/business/ceos-trump-revenge-nightcap/index.html
https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/05/politics/trump-prosecute-political-opponents/index.html
Why they wouldn’t want to please previous administrations?
Those administrations weren’t targeting them.
I think it’s always about the money, plain and simple. If there is a threat to their gravy train, they will bend over backwards to keep it going. Otherwise, they don’t care about you.
The Biden government was targeting them, though. Kind of. Various companies were facing challenges from the administration. I think the difference is: If they suck Trump’s dick enough he’ll leave them alone. Biden was less likely to do that. Or probably that’s their view of it, anyway. Somehow big business seems to view Trump as a “rational actor” while they view Biden as the opposite.
Something something TOS Mirror Universe episode…
Also the obviously reactionary and self-interested history of right wing reaction to FAANG, which largely has been fueled by a backlash to restraints on misinformation, and is riddled with special case exceptions (e.g. Palestine).
By my lights your response is quite effective, and while I appreciate the modesty I think it’s appropriate to bring it over here:
Unfortunately, there’s a line beyond which it’s not okay to view a political party through one issue, and IMO the Republicans have crossed that line.
Privacy is a human rights issue. Republicans have signaled very strongly that they’re going to violate more human rights. It’s a net loss for privacy if that happens, even if big tech is a bit more restrained.
I’m sorry @protonprivacy, you’ve failed this test IMO. It would be one thing to say that given that the Republicans are in power, that Gail Slater is a good pick, but that’s not the stance you took.
“Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.”
That has to be one of the most retarded things I have ever read. You would have to ignore the last 50 years and have a lobotomy to believe that nonsense.
Not entering in the details of the argument, but are you seriously answering an argument that includes “noticing a change in the last years” with “look at the previous 50 years”? From a purely methodological point of view seems completely illogical to do so.
Not all of us are young people who have no recollection of the history of the Republican party. Pretending that there has been some dramatic shift in the last few years is simply false.
Even more false is stating that Republicans are the party of the common man or that they will be the ones to regulate big tech to fix the issues we are facing.
Pretending you can critique an argument without the knowledge of the past and an unwillingness to discuss the details is something else. Truly some peanut gallery level of nonsense.
It’s not a matter of pretending. The fact that there has been a shift is his/their point. If there is a shift it’s implicit that before the shift the situation was different, hence the absurdity of “consider the last 50 years”. You want to contest the fact that there is been a shift, that’s great. But trying to debate the whole argument with “look at the last 50 years” doesn’t touch their argument at all.
Also, in the context of his tweet “the little guy” are small businesses, not the common men. He clarified this point in a reddit comment somewhere, where he mentions small businesses vs big tech. You can go check it out.
Pretending you can critique an argument without the knowledge of the past and an unwillingness to discuss the details is something else. Truly some peanut gallery level of nonsense.
I am not sure what obsession you have with “pretending”, but I was not pretending anything. Arguments can be debated in the method or in the merit. In your case the method seemed to be wrong to me and I stated that. Logically was just inconsequential. This is something that doesn’t depend on the validity of the argument or on my position, it’s just a methodological observation.
You might be right as far as I am concerned, but your argument was absurd nevertheless.
I have already said there was no shift. I will pretend you can follow along. The conservatives have threatened to take away Section 230.
This is because they want social media to stop fact checking and moderating their users so they can spread misinformation aka lies. They don’t want a level playing field. They want to spread misinformation and then control the truth.
So saying they are going to regulate big tech is really just code for threatening them into allowing them to openly lie to people. This is fucking ridiculous.
As typical, conservatives always lean into the small business mantra. That Republicans really care about small business owners whatever the fuck that means. While you won’t discuss the details you are ready to throw some classic Republican propaganda at everyone.
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/big-lie-conservative-policies-good-small-business/
Small business ownership has shrunk dramatically in the last 20 years (oops brought up history) and will continue as the too big to fail billionaires and their megacorps suck up all the capital. You would think that a supposed billionaire who only puts his wealthy friends into power would be a red flag for small business or the little guy.
Not for Sudneo though, he thinks billionaires care about him. He probably thinks Muskrat is worried about his well being and free speech rights. Yeah there is a lot of pretending going on for sure.
I also find it bizarre to say the Democrats need to get rid of their “corporate” support. Apparently they are Dinos because every Democrat must be a left wing liberal socialist. Funny that the Republicans don’t need to do this though. Apparently there are no big corporate Republicans, thank God.
Politics don’t exist just in the moment and I find it disturbing you don’t care about history. Perhaps it is a defense mechanism as the Republican party has been on the same trajectory since Reagan. I guess if I was a conservative trying to rewrite reality I would try to discredit or ignore history as well.
Perhaps this is all driven by the thought that this administration is different. I don’t mean to make fun of people but God damn you would have to be a dumb motherfucker to expect anything different in this administration from last time. Stocks up, regulations down, massive fuckups, and politicize everything. I mean if your kink is being governed by clowns maybe it would be great. https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/democrats/2024/10/the-u-s-economy-performs-better-under-democratic-presidents
The truth is a hard pill to swallow I guess and you can see why the Republicans have committed to a war on truth. They simply cannot exist without their lies and the gullible people who believe them.
This of course is exacerbated by the truly awful people we have allowed to control the next administration. I am no fan of Democratic people but the garbage that is the apparatus of our AOTUS is without parallel. I mean you basically have to be a rapist to get a spot in his cabinet.
Ahaha you still didn’t get it. I don’t care if there was a shift or not. That was their argument, not mine. However, whether the shift was there or not, IT IS IMPLICIT in an argument that mentions a shift that before the shift this didn’t apply. Therefore it’s simply useless to counter THAT argument with “you missed the last 50 years”. I didn’t throw any propaganda. I didn’t even make an argument. You are just trying to pidgeonhole me into a stereotypical position to attack me, because apparently you can’t understand what a methodological remark is.
I will skip over the next paragraphs where you talk about " regulating tech" but you talk about free speech and fake news (that has NOTHING to do with antitrust and monopolies). I do that because I agree, but it’s a completely separate conversation, that has no relationship with the context of Andy’s tweet or our discussion.
really just code for threatening them into allowing them to openly lie to people
You are saying this as if this didn’t regularly happen for years though…
Not for Sudneo though, he thinks billionaires care about him.
I am a communist lol. I would like to see Musk 3 meters under the soil. Please stop making shit up to attack people.
Politics don’t exist just in the moment and I find it disturbing you don’t care about history
See the beginning of this comment. It’s not about not caring, is that what you think is an argument against THEIR position is actually PART of their argument already. Again, a LOGICAL issue. I don’t care about discussing if dem or rep are pro big or small businesses and in which measure, for me American politics is small flavours of right wing, and I have the fortune of not having to vote there.
Perhaps this is all driven by the thought that this administration is different.
Yet another fallacy. have you even read the tweet? Like I do agree with you, but holy shit at the end of a 200 characters sentence the guy said that the antitrust against Google or something was started during the Trump administration. So no, it’s not about being different, I guess, it’s about continuing with what the guy (him, not me) says it’s a trend. You disagree and that’s great, go debate him on why it won’t happen.
Personally, and THIS is my opinion as an outsider, I think this administration is awful and it’s going to fuck up so many things. That said, I will be pleasantly surprised if it will work on breaking some monopolies, even if for all the wrong reasons.
Oh I get it, you just like to keep saying that it’s is not your argument and then you talk about semantics. I will just skip this because you have already said it and it is boring.
I like that you start referencing history yourself though, I appreciate the nod even if it is unintentional.
You remind me of all those sycophants for Drump who are always saying he didn’t mean that or he clarified himself later on. The kind of capitalist bootlicker that pretends to be a communist because it’s edgy. Hey whatever floats your boat I guess.
I think his original statement stands just fine on its own and I think I have made it clear why it is so distasteful.
As someone who was seriously considering signing up for their service seeing them suck up to the right wing is very worrying. I have already left every other social media platform because of their toxic behavior.
At any rate it appears we agree on everything except your obsession with semantics. Stay shifty!
These fuckers act like they’ve never heard of Lina Khan. Let’s see if Republicans try to replace her with someone with a stronger track record. Or, if they’re so serious about tech competition maybe they’ll get on board with net neutrality.
And look, I actually like Gail Slater (the Trump nominee that kicked off this thread). She’s got some bona fides, and I welcome Republicans taking antitrust more seriously, and rolling back the damage done by Robert Bork and his adherents (including and probably most significantly Ronald Reagan).
But to pretend that Democrats are less serious about antitrust than Republicans ignores the huge moves that the Biden administration have made in this area, including outside of big tech.
That is somet nieve horseshit. Goddammit I don’t want to switch email providers again!
Insane that an official company account posted this.
Seems like they have deleted it now. Link is dead. Has there been any further comment?
Fuck, they are dumb and bad businessmen. What’s the reason still to chose their product over Tuta, Posteo, Mullvad? They have lost their unique selling point as at least pretending being a neutral instance providing private services. Plain stupidity.
Their unique selling point is having a suite of integrated privacy products under a single moderately-priced subscription.
N.B. I originally went looking for a reason that maybe it was okay that Andy Yen was giving the thumbs up to Gail Slater. I thought this was an unfair internet pile-on. I think now it’s a fair internet pile-on.
EVERYONE! GET IN HERE!
I was just going to start my de-google to Proton. Time for a new plan.
Eventually you will find you want a mail provider that just supports IMAP / POP without some paid middleman application just to use you email with certain clients else me stuck on the slow web UI. Luckily there are alternatives.
Just some advice for all of you affected by this.
Begin demanding a response from the ownership of this company.
“Is this Message approved by your board, and owners”
Just leaving doesnt make a difference, and some of you in the comments bought services right before this. That fucking sucks.
We dont have journalists and media on our side to help any more(arguably we never did, but that’s a separate discussion)
I think there are still good bones in Proton, but you know where at least one piece cancer is, and its in the worst spot. Demand as stakeholders that they remove the cancer or admit its not going to happen. Repeat your messages until they publicy respond as a company not just the head of it.
Its a shame if you dont do at least as much as expressing that they owe you an explanation and that you need the company as a whole, to why this had happened
This is a betrayal to many of you, tell them exactly what they need to do
Good luck. It only takes one of you to suceed and we all win
“Is this Message approved by your board, and owners”
Didn’t the board already post in full support of this fucker, then try to delete the post for PR damage control?
No.
All that happened is that the official social media account on mastodon and reddit reposted what was Andy’s reply as an official message. It was some internal fuck up apparently, and that’s why they deleted it.
Even in the worst case scenario, the board has nothing to do with it, because this would be the Proton company, not the nonprofit (which controls the company).
Please, don’t make stuff up…
Oh missed that totally, thanks for sharing
He already clarifies that it’s his personal opinion and not a company position, which has the policy to maintain political neutrality (whatever that means), which is the reason why they deleted replies from official accounts. See the reddit post he did or his comments.
On what ground anybody should demand his removal? Based on a personal opinion expressed on twitter, which is at most a naive speculation of what the Trump administration will do in the area of antitrust and big tech?
It’d actually be super useful if all of the VPN CEOs publicly stated which authoritarian leaders they are a fan of, so that consumers can make an informed choice on how easily they’ll sell you out to the security apparatus of your country.
So Proton is out.
Sorry, I won’t trust a service that licks fascist boots.
I was about to pull the trigger on Proton. Good to know, I will never use this service now.
This also reinforces my belief that email should be provided by the government. If they are going to spy on me anyways might as well give it straight to them.
I am sick of private companies providing the primary way we communicate when they can kick you off their platform because they think you look funny.
Taking the time to remove Google, embraced proton mail … Maybe it’s time to just write letters and send meme post cards.
Meme post cards are a great idea actually.
deleted by creator
Extra weird because this is always the narrative, yet Trump could be any further from “standing up for the little guys” if he tried. It’s the same with the AfD in Germany, their voted policies (which is public as per the EU regulations) are as anti-consumer pro-corpo as you can be, even edging our truly crazy libertarian money sucker positions.
“standing up for the little guys” actually means “being racist as fuck”. Hope this helps you understand their position.
“omg, turns out this big tech company is not my friend”
I don’t know if I would describe proton as a big tech company. Even if they were, their whole pitch is “you can trust us”.
Been using their paid service for months. I have so many aliases. I’m just surprised. Surely this company knows its biggest user base has to be too educated to let this slide.
Lots of educated fascists. Having a degree hardly guarantees a progressive worldview. If you’re in an extractive industry or a heavily financialized one, it works against you.
Why is this a bad thing?
Why is it a bad thing that the company I’m supposed to trust to keep my information and communication safe and secure is a boot licker for the incoming fascist asshole and his possy?
Because the main guy seems to like policies and isnt throwing up a red carpet for people to walk into the data centers?
proton has complied with majority of govt requests for info for years
That has usually just been data about where and when the account was created
There is no ethical consumption under capitalism, and that applies to tech. I pay for Proton and this is disappointing af but not shocking. Corporations and wannabe billionaires always fold to fascism.
Gonna start looking around at alternative email services to consider but I use my Proton email everywhere, so switching away is going to suck.
deleted by creator
People don’t accidentally get on a board. The whole idea is that you actively search for and interview and even recruit people who best embody the values of your project. Then you get nominated and often voted.
When you register a domain, you own the whole name-space of that domain:
All possible sub-domains of your domain are yours. All possible URLs on the domain are yours. All possible email addresses on the domain are yours.On your domain, you are also free to choose the linked services such as web, email calendar etc. If you are not satisfied with one provider, you are free to switch to another one at your own convenience.
Burned my accounts, moved to Tuta.
Damn, I’d like to switch provider, but I can’t stand the UX of Tuta.
Any other cheap & bring-your-own-domain alternative?
Fastmail has a fantastic UI. Not E2EE, but the features are solid, and it works really well (nice integration with 1password to create aliases while signing up for sites, too).
