4 ms·
> Mullvad's position is that privacy is a universal right this is kind of a confusing statement considering the source. if you hold that privacy is a universal
by GuinansEyebrows 3mo ago
> Mullvad's position is that privacy is a universal right
this is kind of a confusing statement considering the source. if you hold that privacy is a universal right, but you profit from gating access to it (along with someone who appears to have directed this profit to an appalling political project), are you saying that this right should only be afforded to those who pay for it? or are you just cloaking your business model in a moral shroud?
- kfreds 3mo ago> are you saying that this right should only be afforded to those who pay for it Not at all. When we say we believe privacy is a universal right, we're saying that e.g. states and corporations that actively violate your privacy are in the wrong. We're not saying that Mullvad, you or anyone else are obligated to work for free in order to provide privacy as a service. Does that make sense?
- GuinansEyebrows 3mo ago[flagged]
- jackothy 3mo agoI think you know that this service is impossible to provide for free, and that the quality to cost ratio of Mullvad's service is highly competitive.
- reassess_blind 3mo agoSurely this has to be in bad faith. You cannot seriously be shaming a company for charging for their services, can you?
- GuinansEyebrows 3mo agoa rhetorical question, sure. i didn't really need to include the first question to make the point of the second one.