this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2025
73 points (100.0% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
62574 readers
558 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
🏴☠️ Other communities
FUCK ADOBE!
Torrenting/P2P:
Gaming:
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
@emogu @OccasionallyFeralya sorry, this comes from my ignorance, not to polarize or anything like that but, why Medium is a red flag?
Nothing against Medium inherently but it’s basically a glorified blogging platform. Anyone can get on there and write anything. The red flag comes from someone citing a Medium article as evidence that a privacy CEO can be trusted. I’d hope there would be more substantial sources, say, from a vetted publication by an established writer for example. The fact that someone’s Medium blog was their go-to source is a red flag on their argument for me.
This is such a bizarre take when your own position is based on one or two screenshots of social media posts and the reddit hivemind's reaction to them. You are asking for someone to disprove/debunk your social media pile-on, which had almost zero substance to it, with some kind of in-depth, long-term New York Times investigation which deep down you know will never happen because this shit isn't relevant in the real world. That way you can just instantly dismiss the evidence that actually does exist to the contrary, done by regular people and published on their blogs, without ever having to read it or engage with the counter-argument.
I have the time to read the Medium article but I don’t have the time to vet it and so I have no idea if I can trust it. I don’t know the author and they published it on a platform that has no rigor or guideline for factual reporting. Asking for a better vetted/verified source than a public blog isn’t a pile-on, it’s just thorough info gathering. Since that was the only published evidence listed in the argument, it was safe to assume that it was the best that could be found and as such a bit of a red flag.
We don’t need an NYT article on this niche subject, I agree that’ll never happen. But there are online publications and trusted sources that do travel in these circles. If none of them are saying anything about the topic I don’t think it’s unreasonable to be critical of the way it’s been presented and to expect more sources to help it hold water. I’d love for it to be true, as I’ve used Proton in the past and it’s the only one that ticks all my boxes. But I need more than a medium article to convince me to trust a company with my privacy.
So are just going to ignore the bit where your own argument/opinion is based on even less evidence and scrutiny?
EDIT: Also, what does any of this have to do with Proton's privacy policy? If your argument has any relevance, it's in relation to a moral objection to the CEO's political statements. Proton AG is a Swiss company, none of this actually matters in reality.
@emogu ok, thank you. And yes, maybe another type of source would be better.
It's not a red flag. It's just an easy out for that person because they can run the "lol bLoG aRtIcLe" line to instantly dismiss any evidence that exists to the contrary without ever having to read or engage with it. Their entire argument is still just based on a couple of brief tweets and they have never backed their read of them up with anything, yet somehow when other people also develop a counter-argument based on a much larger and wider source of public material and collate it on a blogging site it's a "rEd fLaG".