4 ms·

Nah, that’s just semantics at this point. Mullvad runs the “random user generator” function for you and just gives you a random number. This lets you run that

Nah, that’s just semantics at this point. Mullvad runs the “random user generator” function for you and just gives you a random number. This lets you run that random generator yourself. If you’re concerned about personal information, the final result is the same. Mullvad makes it so that you can’t even accidentally give them information they don’t need. This leaves it up to your own discretion. I don’t think it’s disingenuous.

InCityDreams 3y ago
>Nah, that’s just semantics at this point. You talking about the green checkmark?
- immanentize 3y ago
  He's talking about the distinction - anybody concerned with privacy should probably be capable of producing or otherwise finding a random username and password.
a2128 3y ago
I don't think such important data should be left up to the user's discretion by a supposedly privacy-focused company. If they're okay with allowing users to enter a personal username, email address, and a password that's probably not unique, and if the attitude is "privacy-concerned people should just know xyz" then I have to wonder what other things they apply this attitude to
- eddythompson80 3y ago
  > Service (A): pick a random username > Service (B): click 'here' to generate a random username (A) is claiming to not require any "personal data". (B) is claiming to not require any "personal data". I'd agree with both A and B's statement. Neither of them are "disingenuous". (B) makes it bulletproof for the stupidest of the stupidest of users. If you use the username "DreadPirateRoberts" across all online services you use. Then act surprised because someone was able to correlate DPR between service X and service Y, It's not service X or Y's fault. You're just a dumbass. Mullvad didn't want to be even remotely in that business. Whether or not their users are bonafide dumbasses or not, they said "fuck it, you morons don't even get to pick your usernames". Which I'm honestly all for. People are stupid and will often and frequently (including the original DPR) get themselves into trouble by being stupid. But I don't see anything that's disingenuous as OP put it about them marking themselves as "don't require personal information"

InCityDreams 3y ago

>Nah, that’s just semantics at this point. You talking about the green checkmark?

immanentize 3y ago
He's talking about the distinction - anybody concerned with privacy should probably be capable of producing or otherwise finding a random username and password.

a2128 3y ago

I don't think such important data should be left up to the user's discretion by a supposedly privacy-focused company. If they're okay with allowing users to enter a personal username, email address, and a password that's probably not unique, and if the attitude is "privacy-concerned people should just know xyz" then I have to wonder what other things they apply this attitude to

eddythompson80 3y ago
> Service (A): pick a random username > Service (B): click 'here' to generate a random username (A) is claiming to not require any "personal data". (B) is claiming to not require any "personal data". I'd agree with both A and B's statement. Neither of them are "disingenuous". (B) makes it bulletproof for the stupidest of the stupidest of users. If you use the username "DreadPirateRoberts" across all online services you use. Then act surprised because someone was able to correlate DPR between service X and service Y, It's not service X or Y's fault. You're just a dumbass. Mullvad didn't want to be even remotely in that business. Whether or not their users are bonafide dumbasses or not, they said "fuck it, you morons don't even get to pick your usernames". Which I'm honestly all for. People are stupid and will often and frequently (including the original DPR) get themselves into trouble by being stupid. But I don't see anything that's disingenuous as OP put it about them marking themselves as "don't require personal information"