3 ms·

To the people using Mullvad I have two sincere and unpopular questions: do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you u

To the people using Mullvad I have two sincere and unpopular questions: do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you use, or is it just a reflexive change of footing whenever you happen upon news like this? Also, do you really switch, or is it just a heat of moment kind of thing and an opportunity to profess yourself?

mrhottakes 4mo ago
[flagged]
- daneel_w 4mo ago
  [flagged]
- anthonyrstevens 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - mrhottakes 4mo ago
    [flagged]
anthonyrstevens 4mo ago
[flagged]
bix6 4mo ago
If alternatives exist some of us are willing to make changes to not support the worst of the worst when their behavior is revealed. I used to like Musk, now I see Tesla and am disgusted. Maybe he was always like this but the personal line for me was the salutes. I’m sure many others have lines as well.
- daneel_w 4mo ago
  How do you know the political party of the story is "the worst of the worst"? You don't.
  - pesus 4mo ago
    [flagged]
    - daneel_w 4mo ago
      [flagged]
      - pesus 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        daneel_w 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        pesus 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        daneel_w 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        pesus 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        dang 4mo ago
        You've both broken the site guidelines badly in this thread, not just in this tit-for-tat spat but generally. Please don't perpetuate flamewars on this site. Please do review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules, regardless of how divisive a topic may be or how provocative you feel someone else's comments are.
fzeroracer 4mo ago
Generally speaking, if the mission of a company is privacy and then the actions of the c-suite or founders indicates that they are more than willing to compromise on that, then yes. Why shouldnt you scrutinize people whose product is not aligned with their goals? And yes I do actively switch products. I left the Windows ecosystem for Linux and I will leave Mullvad for whatever else pops up. So it goes.
al_borland 4mo ago
[flagged]
- dgellow 4mo ago
  [flagged]
- raffael_de 4mo ago
  same here. and the so-called political left is anyway mostly pro surveillance and censorship to curb what they consider fake news or agitation. (so-called b/c the terms left and right are actually pretty meaningless nowadays imo)
nananana9 4mo ago
> do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you use No. > is it just a reflexive change of footing whenever you happen upon news like this Yes. > do you really switch Yes. What is the implication here? That because I did not know that a percentage of the money I give a company went towards supporting a party whose I that I find disgusting, I should keep supporting them now that I do know?
tencentshill 4mo ago
It gives me an excuse to really examine why I started using their product or service and take the time to research alternatives. If the alternative is better, great. If not, what am I willing to lose? Money, convenience, reliability? These are questions you don't want a happy paying customer asking.
corford 4mo ago
>do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you use Yes >or it just a reflexive change of footing whenever you happen upon news like this? No (only when my personal screening didn't already flag it) >do you really switch Yes, where it's feasible
- dnlzro 4mo ago
  > Yes, where it's feasible I think that's what a lot of people in this thread are missing. There are alternatives to Mullvad, so it's pretty easy to take your money elsewhere if you're unhappy with where it's being spent right now. The counter-reaction to the reaction is so dumb. If you think it's silly to boycott a company because of a co-founders political donations, fine. But it's just as silly to try to argue people into not boycotting. Live and let live.
  - deaux 4mo ago
    There are no alternatives to Mullvad where you _know_ that all of the founders have "better" beliefs than this guy. If you have one, share it. What proves the point is that someone suggested moving to Proton, whose founder (not even co-founder AFAIK) is outwardly pro-MAGA. And comments calling that out are the ones that get downvoted. This shows people are just pretending to care. It's not silly to boycott companies in general, but this specific case it's silly. Not because of the reason, but because boycotting only makes sense if it's very likely that an alternative is going to be better in the specific factor that instigates the boycott. In this case, it's not likely, you have no clue whether an alternative is going to have more or less $0.0x of your $1 going to people supporting far-right parties. Especially when VPN companies are known to be some of the dodgiest tech companies in general. Mullvad is one of the most transparent ones.
    - dnlzro 3mo ago
      Your point is relevant, but it’s not the whole story. A rational actor will act on available information. It’s entirely possible that someone unhappy with Mullvad switches to an alternative that is even worse (on whatever dimensions they care about), and they just don’t know it. The question is whether they could’ve expected that outcome on a balance of probabilities. I feel like the default assumption for a company in the privacy space is that they are close to politically neutral (0). Certainly skewing libertarian, but probably not more right (+1) than left (-1). So, if you see that your money is explicitly being siphoned to right-wing political parties (>0), and you don’t like that, it’s rational to switch to an alternative (expected value = 0). Also, “very likely” to be better isn’t necessary, because switching costs are minimal. Also also, saying that Proton’s founder is “outwardly MAGA” is really oversimplifying things. I’m not sure what your viewpoint actually is — maybe you’re just expressing someone else’s — but I’d encourage you to read: https://medium.com/@ovenplayer/does-proton-really-support-trump-a-deeper-analysis-and-surprising-findings-aed4fee4305e https://medium.com/@ovenplayer/does-proton-really-support-tr...
have_faith 4mo ago
There's nothing wrong with acting on new information as and when it surfaces in your life without obsessively staying up to date with every entity you engage with. That's the reasonable, pragmatic approach to trying to do the right thing without overwhelming yourself with the burden of being perfect. It's not a gotcha if you're inconsistent from an outsiders perspective, we're all doing the best we can with what little insight we have into reality.
- deaux 4mo ago
  > There's nothing wrong with acting on new information as and when it surfaces in your life without obsessively staying up to date with every entity you engage with. So you're saying the majority of the people here who say they're leaving Mullvad, have: 1. Not heard of Bezos' funding of the Trump family, or don't use Amazon at all 2. Not heard of Zuckerberg/Meta's [insert countless despicable things here], or don't have Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp installed at all 3. Not heard of OpenAIs free pass on the Trump administration using their models for war purposes without limitations, or don't use OpenAI at all 4. And so forth? Clearly, no. Because it has nothing to do with coming across information without obsessively staying up to date with every entity. The same people have come across much of the above information, yet continue not to act on it, despite most of them being magnitudes worse than this case.
  - have_faith 3mo ago
    Coming across information isn't the same as: - having the emotional energy reserves left to act on it - fully understanding the repercussions of the thing - feeling like your actions in this case will have any affect - many other reasons you can't stay consistent from an outsiders perspective You're trying to apply an objective measure of reality to everyone else: if they disagree with X, they must therefore also disagree with Y, otherwise they shouldn't act on X. It's an unreasonable expectation of perfect action.
    - em-bee 3mo ago
      you missed the most important one: there is no alternative. and another relevant one: don't have the resources to switch. (cost of research and moving) and: depend on other people whose mind you are unable to change. i haven't found any other vpn providers that work like mullvad for example. (i think one has been mentioned here but i'll have to research that one first before i can consider it.) i can't switch away from whatsapp or wechat because too many people are on there that i can't reach in any other way. my customers are using AWS or google and i am not in the position to change their mind, and i don't have the luxury to fire customers over this.
carlosjobim 4mo ago
When it's about boycotting a product like Bud Light or Mullvad, there are so many equal offers from competitors that it isn't difficult to boycott and switch to another product. Maybe companies in those kind of markets will simply bite the bullet and start marketing their products as for one side or for the other in politics instead of trying to be for everybody. Then they can lock-in strong goodwill from "their side", and stand on more certain footing. Or maybe most customers do not care as much as online activists.
tumetab1 4mo ago
You expect to discuss ideas with a mob? :) It's like the meme of nuclear energy help with climate change and the answer is "I don't want to solutions, I want to abolish capitalism!"

mrhottakes 4mo ago

[flagged]

daneel_w 4mo ago
[flagged]
anthonyrstevens 4mo ago
[flagged]
- mrhottakes 4mo ago
  [flagged]

anthonyrstevens 4mo ago

[flagged]

bix6 4mo ago

If alternatives exist some of us are willing to make changes to not support the worst of the worst when their behavior is revealed. I used to like Musk, now I see Tesla and am disgusted. Maybe he was always like this but the personal line for me was the salutes. I’m sure many others have lines as well.

daneel_w 4mo ago
How do you know the political party of the story is "the worst of the worst"? You don't.
- pesus 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - daneel_w 4mo ago
    [flagged]
    - pesus 4mo ago
      [flagged]
      - daneel_w 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        pesus 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        daneel_w 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        pesus 4mo ago
        [flagged]
        dang 4mo ago
        You've both broken the site guidelines badly in this thread, not just in this tit-for-tat spat but generally. Please don't perpetuate flamewars on this site. Please do review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules, regardless of how divisive a topic may be or how provocative you feel someone else's comments are.

fzeroracer 4mo ago

Generally speaking, if the mission of a company is privacy and then the actions of the c-suite or founders indicates that they are more than willing to compromise on that, then yes. Why shouldnt you scrutinize people whose product is not aligned with their goals? And yes I do actively switch products. I left the Windows ecosystem for Linux and I will leave Mullvad for whatever else pops up. So it goes.

al_borland 4mo ago

[flagged]

dgellow 4mo ago
[flagged]
raffael_de 4mo ago
same here. and the so-called political left is anyway mostly pro surveillance and censorship to curb what they consider fake news or agitation. (so-called b/c the terms left and right are actually pretty meaningless nowadays imo)

nananana9 4mo ago

> do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you use No. > is it just a reflexive change of footing whenever you happen upon news like this Yes. > do you really switch Yes. What is the implication here? That because I did not know that a percentage of the money I give a company went towards supporting a party whose I that I find disgusting, I should keep supporting them now that I do know?

tencentshill 4mo ago

It gives me an excuse to really examine why I started using their product or service and take the time to research alternatives. If the alternative is better, great. If not, what am I willing to lose? Money, convenience, reliability? These are questions you don't want a happy paying customer asking.

corford 4mo ago

>do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you use Yes >or it just a reflexive change of footing whenever you happen upon news like this? No (only when my personal screening didn't already flag it) >do you really switch Yes, where it's feasible

dnlzro 4mo ago
> Yes, where it's feasible I think that's what a lot of people in this thread are missing. There are alternatives to Mullvad, so it's pretty easy to take your money elsewhere if you're unhappy with where it's being spent right now. The counter-reaction to the reaction is so dumb. If you think it's silly to boycott a company because of a co-founders political donations, fine. But it's just as silly to try to argue people into not boycotting. Live and let live.
- deaux 4mo ago
  There are no alternatives to Mullvad where you _know_ that all of the founders have "better" beliefs than this guy. If you have one, share it. What proves the point is that someone suggested moving to Proton, whose founder (not even co-founder AFAIK) is outwardly pro-MAGA. And comments calling that out are the ones that get downvoted. This shows people are just pretending to care. It's not silly to boycott companies in general, but this specific case it's silly. Not because of the reason, but because boycotting only makes sense if it's very likely that an alternative is going to be better in the specific factor that instigates the boycott. In this case, it's not likely, you have no clue whether an alternative is going to have more or less $0.0x of your $1 going to people supporting far-right parties. Especially when VPN companies are known to be some of the dodgiest tech companies in general. Mullvad is one of the most transparent ones.
  - dnlzro 3mo ago
    Your point is relevant, but it’s not the whole story. A rational actor will act on available information. It’s entirely possible that someone unhappy with Mullvad switches to an alternative that is even worse (on whatever dimensions they care about), and they just don’t know it. The question is whether they could’ve expected that outcome on a balance of probabilities. I feel like the default assumption for a company in the privacy space is that they are close to politically neutral (0). Certainly skewing libertarian, but probably not more right (+1) than left (-1). So, if you see that your money is explicitly being siphoned to right-wing political parties (>0), and you don’t like that, it’s rational to switch to an alternative (expected value = 0). Also, “very likely” to be better isn’t necessary, because switching costs are minimal. Also also, saying that Proton’s founder is “outwardly MAGA” is really oversimplifying things. I’m not sure what your viewpoint actually is — maybe you’re just expressing someone else’s — but I’d encourage you to read: https://medium.com/@ovenplayer/does-proton-really-support-trump-a-deeper-analysis-and-surprising-findings-aed4fee4305e https://medium.com/@ovenplayer/does-proton-really-support-tr...

have_faith 4mo ago

There's nothing wrong with acting on new information as and when it surfaces in your life without obsessively staying up to date with every entity you engage with. That's the reasonable, pragmatic approach to trying to do the right thing without overwhelming yourself with the burden of being perfect. It's not a gotcha if you're inconsistent from an outsiders perspective, we're all doing the best we can with what little insight we have into reality.

deaux 4mo ago
> There's nothing wrong with acting on new information as and when it surfaces in your life without obsessively staying up to date with every entity you engage with. So you're saying the majority of the people here who say they're leaving Mullvad, have: 1. Not heard of Bezos' funding of the Trump family, or don't use Amazon at all 2. Not heard of Zuckerberg/Meta's [insert countless despicable things here], or don't have Facebook/Instagram/Whatsapp installed at all 3. Not heard of OpenAIs free pass on the Trump administration using their models for war purposes without limitations, or don't use OpenAI at all 4. And so forth? Clearly, no. Because it has nothing to do with coming across information without obsessively staying up to date with every entity. The same people have come across much of the above information, yet continue not to act on it, despite most of them being magnitudes worse than this case.
- have_faith 3mo ago
  Coming across information isn't the same as: - having the emotional energy reserves left to act on it - fully understanding the repercussions of the thing - feeling like your actions in this case will have any affect - many other reasons you can't stay consistent from an outsiders perspective You're trying to apply an objective measure of reality to everyone else: if they disagree with X, they must therefore also disagree with Y, otherwise they shouldn't act on X. It's an unreasonable expectation of perfect action.
  - em-bee 3mo ago
    you missed the most important one: there is no alternative. and another relevant one: don't have the resources to switch. (cost of research and moving) and: depend on other people whose mind you are unable to change. i haven't found any other vpn providers that work like mullvad for example. (i think one has been mentioned here but i'll have to research that one first before i can consider it.) i can't switch away from whatsapp or wechat because too many people are on there that i can't reach in any other way. my customers are using AWS or google and i am not in the position to change their mind, and i don't have the luxury to fire customers over this.

carlosjobim 4mo ago

When it's about boycotting a product like Bud Light or Mullvad, there are so many equal offers from competitors that it isn't difficult to boycott and switch to another product. Maybe companies in those kind of markets will simply bite the bullet and start marketing their products as for one side or for the other in politics instead of trying to be for everybody. Then they can lock-in strong goodwill from "their side", and stand on more certain footing. Or maybe most customers do not care as much as online activists.

tumetab1 4mo ago

You expect to discuss ideas with a mob? :) It's like the meme of nuclear energy help with climate change and the answer is "I don't want to solutions, I want to abolish capitalism!"