5 ms·

So you're a political company, but you don't want people to examine the politics of the people running the company? That seems naive.

nomel 3mo ago
[flagged]
- devindotcom 3mo ago
  "It should be obvious that Daniel's private donation to a political party is not part of Mullvad's values or mission."
  - panarky 3mo ago
    It should be obvious that it is utterly incompatible with the values and mission of Mullvad for a Mullvad executive to give a large amount money from Mullvad customers to advance public policy with the primary and direct intent to restrict freedom of expression.
    - csande17 3mo ago
      Do you have any links/context on how this party plans to restrict freedom of expression?
      - willmarch 3mo ago
        Ask the people they plan to deport for not acting and expressing themselves in a certain way.
        account42 3mo ago
        Please do expand on what actions and expressions are being targeted and how.
    - yde_java 3mo ago
      > to advance public policy with the primary and direct intent to restrict freedom of expression. I'd love to see you proving this claim as I believe that's not what the party stands for.
    - jasonvorhe 3mo ago
      I have yet to find any proof that this actually part of their political program. Can you elaborate on that?
      - jasonvorhe 3mo ago
        Interesting how many similar questions were raised with barely any responses. Seems like there isn't a lot of substance around the nightmare deportation scenarios some seem to believe in.
  - carlosjobim 3mo ago
    Why do you think that quote supports your argument?
    - devindotcom 3mo ago
      If we're going to sealion, why don't you first explain what you think my argument is and why the quote does not support it?
      - carlosjobim 3mo ago
        Accusation: "So you're a political company, but you don't want people to examine the politics of the people running the company? That seems naive." Supposed evidence: "It should be obvious that Daniel's private donation to a political party is not part of Mullvad's values or mission." But the second quote has nothing to do with the accusation. He never said that he was against people examining the politics of the people running the company. Not even hinting at it. This hasn't anything to do with you, but I also notice that people are flagging and [dead]ing completely reasonable comments in this thread, making any kind of decent conversation quite hard. What is the point of being in a comment thread, if we figuratively "kill" every person who doesn't follow only one allowed view. Are hackers doing this because they are the same type of persons who would literally kill people with differing views if they had such opportunity and power?
        devindotcom 3mo ago
        sorry but your argument is sophomoric and disingenuous. and your absurd complaint about "killing" makes it pretty clear you're not engaging in good faith.
        nomel 3mo ago
        https://hackersmacker.org https://hackersmacker.org is pretty great. It allows me to not waste effort. After using it for a while now, there's incredible consistency with people I mark making the same shallow types of comment/inability to think. I think tribalism is just more pronounced in some people.
panarky 3mo ago
>> Being in a tolerant and intellectually open environment ... Karl Popper said, "Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." >> the same way that someone's opinions on animal rights, taxes or public healthcare ... We're not talking about reasonable people disagreeing about tax policy, we're talking about free expression, the entire purpose of Mullvad. When you make a large donation to a political party whose most fundamental policy is restricting the free expression of people, that is wholly incompatible with everything Mullvad says they stand for. When a founder and executive with influence over Mullvad policy and operations is exposed actively and financially support restricting free expression of people, it's not "tolerant" to pretend that's somehow compatible with the mission and brand of the company.
- armchairhacker 3mo ago
  > restricting the free expression of people I don’t support remigration, but calling immigration “the free expression of people” is a stretch. It’s orthogonal. You can argue that remigration isn’t protecting the privacy of those who are surveilled by the government or deported to repressive countries that surveil their population. But Mullvad’s product protects even those people (it must, because it hides the identity of who’s using it from itself).
  - ambicapter 3mo ago
    The words "immigration" or "remigration" do not appear in the comment you are replying to. That's wholly your own construction.
    - torginus 3mo ago
      It does not, but does appear on the party's English wikipedia page that they support 'remigration'. However when switching to Swedish, it seems they are pro (forceful) assmilation, rather than remigration. I don't know enough of Swedish politics or social issues to determine which one is the more correct characterization of the party, but even that is a serious difference in policy.
neya 3mo ago
"Rules for thee, but not for me" Classic
jasonvorhe 3mo ago
I don't see him saying he doesn't want people to look into that. What I see is an explanation for why he thinks the company is better for having a multitude of views and opinions on their staff, a correction of some lazy reporting in the media and stated tolerance for people who no longer want to use said company's products for perceived value incompatibility (which he also seems to disagree with though).
kfreds 3mo ago
Allow me to provide some nuance. I cannot speak for Daniel. I know there are some policies he likes and there are things he doesn’t like. Personally I am not a fan. This morning Daniel explained his rationale to most of the company. Speaking for myself, I don’t like that he made this donation and I know this view is shared by many of my colleagues. Speaking as the co-CEO of Mullvad, we will continue to protect the universal right to privacy. People should feel safe using Mullvad regardless of their political affiliation.
- willmarch 3mo ago
  Oscar: "Look it doesn’t take a genius to know that every organization thrives when it has two leaders. shakes head Go ahead, name a country that doesn’t have two presidents. A boat that sets sail without two captains. Where would Catholicism be without the popes?"
  - peterfirefly 3mo ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_consul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_consul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope
- gulbanana 3mo ago
  When Mullvad's revenue is used to harm people, why should its customers feel safe?

nomel 3mo ago

[flagged]

devindotcom 3mo ago
"It should be obvious that Daniel's private donation to a political party is not part of Mullvad's values or mission."
- panarky 3mo ago
  It should be obvious that it is utterly incompatible with the values and mission of Mullvad for a Mullvad executive to give a large amount money from Mullvad customers to advance public policy with the primary and direct intent to restrict freedom of expression.
  - csande17 3mo ago
    Do you have any links/context on how this party plans to restrict freedom of expression?
    - willmarch 3mo ago
      Ask the people they plan to deport for not acting and expressing themselves in a certain way.
      - account42 3mo ago
        Please do expand on what actions and expressions are being targeted and how.
  - yde_java 3mo ago
    > to advance public policy with the primary and direct intent to restrict freedom of expression. I'd love to see you proving this claim as I believe that's not what the party stands for.
  - jasonvorhe 3mo ago
    I have yet to find any proof that this actually part of their political program. Can you elaborate on that?
    - jasonvorhe 3mo ago
      Interesting how many similar questions were raised with barely any responses. Seems like there isn't a lot of substance around the nightmare deportation scenarios some seem to believe in.
- carlosjobim 3mo ago
  Why do you think that quote supports your argument?
  - devindotcom 3mo ago
    If we're going to sealion, why don't you first explain what you think my argument is and why the quote does not support it?
    - carlosjobim 3mo ago
      Accusation: "So you're a political company, but you don't want people to examine the politics of the people running the company? That seems naive." Supposed evidence: "It should be obvious that Daniel's private donation to a political party is not part of Mullvad's values or mission." But the second quote has nothing to do with the accusation. He never said that he was against people examining the politics of the people running the company. Not even hinting at it. This hasn't anything to do with you, but I also notice that people are flagging and [dead]ing completely reasonable comments in this thread, making any kind of decent conversation quite hard. What is the point of being in a comment thread, if we figuratively "kill" every person who doesn't follow only one allowed view. Are hackers doing this because they are the same type of persons who would literally kill people with differing views if they had such opportunity and power?
      - devindotcom 3mo ago
        sorry but your argument is sophomoric and disingenuous. and your absurd complaint about "killing" makes it pretty clear you're not engaging in good faith.
      - nomel 3mo ago
        https://hackersmacker.org https://hackersmacker.org is pretty great. It allows me to not waste effort. After using it for a while now, there's incredible consistency with people I mark making the same shallow types of comment/inability to think. I think tribalism is just more pronounced in some people.

panarky 3mo ago

>> Being in a tolerant and intellectually open environment ... Karl Popper said, "Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." >> the same way that someone's opinions on animal rights, taxes or public healthcare ... We're not talking about reasonable people disagreeing about tax policy, we're talking about free expression, the entire purpose of Mullvad. When you make a large donation to a political party whose most fundamental policy is restricting the free expression of people, that is wholly incompatible with everything Mullvad says they stand for. When a founder and executive with influence over Mullvad policy and operations is exposed actively and financially support restricting free expression of people, it's not "tolerant" to pretend that's somehow compatible with the mission and brand of the company.

armchairhacker 3mo ago
> restricting the free expression of people I don’t support remigration, but calling immigration “the free expression of people” is a stretch. It’s orthogonal. You can argue that remigration isn’t protecting the privacy of those who are surveilled by the government or deported to repressive countries that surveil their population. But Mullvad’s product protects even those people (it must, because it hides the identity of who’s using it from itself).
- ambicapter 3mo ago
  The words "immigration" or "remigration" do not appear in the comment you are replying to. That's wholly your own construction.
  - torginus 3mo ago
    It does not, but does appear on the party's English wikipedia page that they support 'remigration'. However when switching to Swedish, it seems they are pro (forceful) assmilation, rather than remigration. I don't know enough of Swedish politics or social issues to determine which one is the more correct characterization of the party, but even that is a serious difference in policy.

neya 3mo ago

"Rules for thee, but not for me" Classic

jasonvorhe 3mo ago

I don't see him saying he doesn't want people to look into that. What I see is an explanation for why he thinks the company is better for having a multitude of views and opinions on their staff, a correction of some lazy reporting in the media and stated tolerance for people who no longer want to use said company's products for perceived value incompatibility (which he also seems to disagree with though).

kfreds 3mo ago

Allow me to provide some nuance. I cannot speak for Daniel. I know there are some policies he likes and there are things he doesn’t like. Personally I am not a fan. This morning Daniel explained his rationale to most of the company. Speaking for myself, I don’t like that he made this donation and I know this view is shared by many of my colleagues. Speaking as the co-CEO of Mullvad, we will continue to protect the universal right to privacy. People should feel safe using Mullvad regardless of their political affiliation.

willmarch 3mo ago
Oscar: "Look it doesn’t take a genius to know that every organization thrives when it has two leaders. shakes head Go ahead, name a country that doesn’t have two presidents. A boat that sets sail without two captains. Where would Catholicism be without the popes?"
- peterfirefly 3mo ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_consul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_consul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antipope
gulbanana 3mo ago
When Mullvad's revenue is used to harm people, why should its customers feel safe?