4 ms·

Donation Controversy

60 points by Cider9986 3mo ago

t-van 3mo ago
Who is the most trusted VPN provider now?
- Cider9986 3mo ago
  Mullvad, IVPN and Proton VPN are all trusted so choosing depends on your priorities with the small differences between them. https://www.privacyguides.org/en/vpn/ https://www.privacyguides.org/en/vpn/ Obscura by definition is the same or better than Mullvad because of the multi-party relay. Similar with iCloud Private Relay but that's only for Safari which is inadequate. Nym looks promising but mixnets haven't been tested as much as the Tor network.
  - kivle 3mo ago
    Proton VPN had their own controversial episode earlier this summer: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48446899 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48446899
    - Cider9986 3mo ago
      I don't think what happened with Proton was controversial.
gnabgib 3mo ago
Related: I'm Done with Mullvad (65 points, 14 hours ago, 175 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48975428 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48975428 The CEO of Mullvad is the main financer of the Swedish Örebro party (118+695 points, last month, 3+1588 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48687508 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48687508 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48717469 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48717469
bigyabai 3mo ago
> We have nurtured a culture of radical tolerance. Play radical games, win radical prizes. The last place I want my money going is towards radical authoritarianism, a cause that I thought Mullvad would thoroughly oppose. > Self-censorship out of fear is an even bigger dampener than direct censorship. Bullshit. Self-censorship is a self-preservation mechanism, a VPN doesn't change the consequences of saying illegal or offensive things. Direct censorship is an abuse of the monopoly on power, and much more inhumane than just feeling insecure about your edgy ideas being attached to your identity.
- cryzinger 3mo ago
  The "radical tolerance" thing is also a little ironic, since the biggest controversy with the party that the founder donated to is that the party isn't tolerant of people from different backgrounds or nationalities... [insert Paradox of Tolerance quote here]
  - dijit 3mo ago
    Tolerant is the wrong word to choose because tolerant doesn't mean "accepting" it means... to tolerate. And the most extreme position they have stated is that "it doesn't matter if you're born here, if you commit crimes and don't respect the culture you should probably leave". That is an extreme position, but it's not as black as people seem to paint it, which implies heavily that the party is just simply racist against non-swedes. The actual racist party is the second most voted for party in Sweden, I think because of how intolerant the society has been about talking about the issues caused by migration. That is my own opinion though, as a migrant, living in the city with the most migrants in Sweden.
    - pstuart 3mo ago
      > don't respect the culture That's where it gets messy, at least in the States. note: I have family in Sweden that are non-white but I've never discussed the issue as it felt a bit too "delicate"
      - 3mo ago
redsocksfan45 3mo ago
[dead]
calldacopsidgaf 3mo ago
"Mullvad will continue to keep its values and mission separate from the broader views of its founders." - the sentence immediately following a link to Daniel's soapbox blog post
sxp 3mo ago
For those unfamiliar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party The party has been variously characterised as left-wing and right-wing, as well as populist, nationalist and conservative. Some key issues for the Örebro Party locally include strong secularism, a 30-hour workweek with retained pay, lowered wages for politicians, expanded social housing, abolishing preschool-fees, making public transport free of charge,[3] ending taxpayer funding of what it sees as wasteful sculptures, monuments and art and introducing free dental care.[4][5] Nationally the party has set out large-scale remigration, closing the Swedish borders to immigration, a stricter assimilation policy and ending taxes on energy and fuel as some of its key issues. The message from the CEO about the donation: https://dberntsson.info/ https://dberntsson.info/ And for those who may not be old enough to remember the last time this happened in the techsphere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich#Appointment_to_CEO_and_resignation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich#Appointment_to_CE...
- EA-3167 3mo ago
  It sounds like the usual far right bottom line dressed up with a bunch of “Free Pizza” promises to cover it with a veneer. Personally I wish people like his had the balls to stop hiding behind that kind of thing, we all know what someone is about when “immigration is the main problem” in their viewpoint. Own it. Or if it’s something to be ashamed of… accept the shame.
  - viccis 3mo ago
    Not really, this looks more like pre-1990s leftism that you see from people like Caesar Chavez. Broadly redistributive policies towards the working class and a strict curbing of immigration as a source of exploited labor underclass for corporations to fatten their margins. There's a reason Bernie called open borders a "Koch brothers proposal".
    - OkayPhysicist 3mo ago
      There is a very, very, very large gap between "open borders" and "keep all those disgusting foreigners out". I guarantee if you ask the average "immigration control activist" in most countries what the acceptable number of brown people to let into their country is, the answer is zero. Because the most active members of these movements are motivated by racism.
JLO64 3mo ago
Personally, I'd rather not have a company I work for police my social media and political activities just so that they fit with what the company desires. That would make me quit as I value a separation between my personal and work activities. That said, the fact that the person involved is the founder of this company (not a regular employee) does change things though. I don't know anything about the politics involved, but (with the exception of recent American executives) I would imagine you would want the people who run your company to be more neutral as to prevent controversy (or at least do so quietly).
- panarky 3mo ago
  I don't want the founders and operators of my free-expression tool to be neutral. I want them to be strongly biased in favor of free expression. But they take my money and use it restrict how people dress, how they pray, what customs they are allowed to follow, what they teach their kids. The agenda they support is anti-free-expression, and that's worse than neutral.
- streetfighter64 3mo ago
  > or at least do so quietly No, I think it's pretty good that they don't hide it. Customers should be well informed what their money goes to, and if the profits go to funding politics the customers disagree with they should be able to make an informed decision about that.
teravor 3mo ago
it was a mistake to respond, over 90% of the controversy is performative as it nearly always is. the ideologues will posture and claim that they are dropping mullvad while being unlikely to follow through. most people wouldn't even know the controversy happened nor care. with the response, you now trigger various human instincts that draw attention, promote further gossiping and wondering where the fire is with all the smoke.
- letmevoteplease 3mo ago
  A mistake from a public relations perspective, but I think taking an explicit stance against deplatforming and self-censorship is consistent with Mullvad's stated mission.
  - streetfighter64 3mo ago
    > deplatforming and self-censorship What? How's publishing information about where a company's profits go, and letting the customers decide if that's something they want to support, in any way related to "deplatforming" or "censorship"?
- sapphicsnail 3mo ago
  I'm really sad about it but I'm not going to renew Mullvad once the 6 months I already payed for are up. I'm fine supporting companies that have people with poliical views I initially interested in Mullvad for political reasons and one of the founders giving a significant amount of money to a political group that wants to restrict the rights of other people is too much for me. Not everyone is cynical. Some of us have actual values we act on.
  - dijit 3mo ago
    Its worth considering that this is a left wing populist party that doesn’t like immigration, and what was actually said (the major controversy) is that even if you are born in Sweden, if you commit crimes and do not make any effort to be Swedish: you probably shouldn’t be here. How this is represented by people is different than that, and its hard for people who don’t speak Swedish to listen to the original sources, but be assured that in Sweden there is an actual party founded by Nazi sympathisers and it is the second most voted for party. I get not wanting to support someone you think has immoral views, but check the facts first before blacklisting a company that is filled with people trying to push for a more open, private yet transparent internet.
0xy 3mo ago
Only in Europe could a party with socialist-leaning values on every single issue except immigration be branded 'far right'. This is the case in every single European country for some reason. Marine Le Pen's party in France leans socialist on econ but is painted as 'far right' for the same reason.
- slopinthebag 3mo ago
  [flagged]
  - OkayPhysicist 3mo ago
    Congrats on falling for hundred year old propaganda. Fascism loves dancing around in the flayed skin of the socialism it violently represses. Go look into what they did to trade unions if you think the Nazis were some Worker's Party.
    - slopinthebag 3mo ago
      The Nazi’s were National Socialists, which is very obviously different from Marxism-Leninism, and was/is a very specific kind of evil. You can’t divorce the National from the Socialism, and that’s not my goal. Go look into what the soviets did to trade unions.
      - dijit 3mo ago
        And the Democratic Peoples Republic Of Korea is super Democratic. https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists
truthier 3mo ago
[flagged]
- actionfromafar 3mo ago
  [flagged]
truthier 3mo ago
[flagged]
viccis 3mo ago
I don't see how that particular political expression is a risk to their VPN's stance. This is a lot of nothing; would have been better to ignore the screeching from Bluesky.
- m4xp 3mo ago
  In fact I would argue that if he was cancelled like the mob wanted it would reflect badly on mullvad, If you cave to a bunch of Twitter warriors am I supposed to trust you from keeping my privacy when the government comes knocking?
_def 3mo ago
> We want to liken Mullvad to a force of nature. Or to cryptography. It just mechanically does its thing with no human arbiters. I can't even find the right words to describe how wrong this sounds to me
stego-tech 3mo ago
It’s Cloudflare and Stormfront all over again, at least from my perspective. As much as folks want to somehow find a way to separate a company from its leadership or founders, the reality is that giving money to Mullvad rewards someone who in turn gives their share of the money to, well, fascist scumbags. People need to understand taking that position is itself free speech. Nobody is saying he can’t give money to Nazis or fascists or some other problematic group, what we’re saying is that there are consequences for doing so. If Mullvad wanted to distance itself from these problematic positions or people, they could just buy them out and tell them to fuck off. That, too, is a perfectly valid response that doesn’t impugn upon anyone’s speech. The problem with people claiming to be pro-free speech or anti-censorship while supporting authoritarian regimes or ideologies is that the two are inherently in conflict: the absolute last thing a fascist actually wants is freedom of speech, and so hiding behind such a virtuous shield while directly contributing to groups whose goals would dismantle and destroy that shield wholesale is such a naked act of hypocrisy that anything else they say or do should be suspect. Mullvad’s position, much like Cloudflare’s before it, is that we must tolerate the intolerant, even though the goals of the intolerant are to exterminate tolerance. This is the sort of Middle School thought experiment that should be a no-brainer, yet here we are again. For a company like Mullvad, that undermines their core currency - trust - at a foundational level that’s impossible to reconcile.

60 points by Cider9986 3mo ago

t-van 3mo ago

Who is the most trusted VPN provider now?

Cider9986 3mo ago
Mullvad, IVPN and Proton VPN are all trusted so choosing depends on your priorities with the small differences between them. https://www.privacyguides.org/en/vpn/ https://www.privacyguides.org/en/vpn/ Obscura by definition is the same or better than Mullvad because of the multi-party relay. Similar with iCloud Private Relay but that's only for Safari which is inadequate. Nym looks promising but mixnets haven't been tested as much as the Tor network.
- kivle 3mo ago
  Proton VPN had their own controversial episode earlier this summer: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48446899 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48446899
  - Cider9986 3mo ago
    I don't think what happened with Proton was controversial.

gnabgib 3mo ago

Related: I'm Done with Mullvad (65 points, 14 hours ago, 175 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48975428 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48975428 The CEO of Mullvad is the main financer of the Swedish Örebro party (118+695 points, last month, 3+1588 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48687508 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48687508 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48717469 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48717469

bigyabai 3mo ago

> We have nurtured a culture of radical tolerance. Play radical games, win radical prizes. The last place I want my money going is towards radical authoritarianism, a cause that I thought Mullvad would thoroughly oppose. > Self-censorship out of fear is an even bigger dampener than direct censorship. Bullshit. Self-censorship is a self-preservation mechanism, a VPN doesn't change the consequences of saying illegal or offensive things. Direct censorship is an abuse of the monopoly on power, and much more inhumane than just feeling insecure about your edgy ideas being attached to your identity.

cryzinger 3mo ago
The "radical tolerance" thing is also a little ironic, since the biggest controversy with the party that the founder donated to is that the party isn't tolerant of people from different backgrounds or nationalities... [insert Paradox of Tolerance quote here]
- dijit 3mo ago
  Tolerant is the wrong word to choose because tolerant doesn't mean "accepting" it means... to tolerate. And the most extreme position they have stated is that "it doesn't matter if you're born here, if you commit crimes and don't respect the culture you should probably leave". That is an extreme position, but it's not as black as people seem to paint it, which implies heavily that the party is just simply racist against non-swedes. The actual racist party is the second most voted for party in Sweden, I think because of how intolerant the society has been about talking about the issues caused by migration. That is my own opinion though, as a migrant, living in the city with the most migrants in Sweden.
  - pstuart 3mo ago
    > don't respect the culture That's where it gets messy, at least in the States. note: I have family in Sweden that are non-white but I've never discussed the issue as it felt a bit too "delicate"
    - 3mo ago

redsocksfan45 3mo ago

[dead]

calldacopsidgaf 3mo ago

"Mullvad will continue to keep its values and mission separate from the broader views of its founders." - the sentence immediately following a link to Daniel's soapbox blog post

sxp 3mo ago

For those unfamiliar: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party The party has been variously characterised as left-wing and right-wing, as well as populist, nationalist and conservative. Some key issues for the Örebro Party locally include strong secularism, a 30-hour workweek with retained pay, lowered wages for politicians, expanded social housing, abolishing preschool-fees, making public transport free of charge,[3] ending taxpayer funding of what it sees as wasteful sculptures, monuments and art and introducing free dental care.[4][5] Nationally the party has set out large-scale remigration, closing the Swedish borders to immigration, a stricter assimilation policy and ending taxes on energy and fuel as some of its key issues. The message from the CEO about the donation: https://dberntsson.info/ https://dberntsson.info/ And for those who may not be old enough to remember the last time this happened in the techsphere: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich#Appointment_to_CEO_and_resignation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Eich#Appointment_to_CE...

EA-3167 3mo ago
It sounds like the usual far right bottom line dressed up with a bunch of “Free Pizza” promises to cover it with a veneer. Personally I wish people like his had the balls to stop hiding behind that kind of thing, we all know what someone is about when “immigration is the main problem” in their viewpoint. Own it. Or if it’s something to be ashamed of… accept the shame.
- viccis 3mo ago
  Not really, this looks more like pre-1990s leftism that you see from people like Caesar Chavez. Broadly redistributive policies towards the working class and a strict curbing of immigration as a source of exploited labor underclass for corporations to fatten their margins. There's a reason Bernie called open borders a "Koch brothers proposal".
  - OkayPhysicist 3mo ago
    There is a very, very, very large gap between "open borders" and "keep all those disgusting foreigners out". I guarantee if you ask the average "immigration control activist" in most countries what the acceptable number of brown people to let into their country is, the answer is zero. Because the most active members of these movements are motivated by racism.

JLO64 3mo ago

Personally, I'd rather not have a company I work for police my social media and political activities just so that they fit with what the company desires. That would make me quit as I value a separation between my personal and work activities. That said, the fact that the person involved is the founder of this company (not a regular employee) does change things though. I don't know anything about the politics involved, but (with the exception of recent American executives) I would imagine you would want the people who run your company to be more neutral as to prevent controversy (or at least do so quietly).

panarky 3mo ago
I don't want the founders and operators of my free-expression tool to be neutral. I want them to be strongly biased in favor of free expression. But they take my money and use it restrict how people dress, how they pray, what customs they are allowed to follow, what they teach their kids. The agenda they support is anti-free-expression, and that's worse than neutral.
streetfighter64 3mo ago
> or at least do so quietly No, I think it's pretty good that they don't hide it. Customers should be well informed what their money goes to, and if the profits go to funding politics the customers disagree with they should be able to make an informed decision about that.

teravor 3mo ago

it was a mistake to respond, over 90% of the controversy is performative as it nearly always is. the ideologues will posture and claim that they are dropping mullvad while being unlikely to follow through. most people wouldn't even know the controversy happened nor care. with the response, you now trigger various human instincts that draw attention, promote further gossiping and wondering where the fire is with all the smoke.

letmevoteplease 3mo ago
A mistake from a public relations perspective, but I think taking an explicit stance against deplatforming and self-censorship is consistent with Mullvad's stated mission.
- streetfighter64 3mo ago
  > deplatforming and self-censorship What? How's publishing information about where a company's profits go, and letting the customers decide if that's something they want to support, in any way related to "deplatforming" or "censorship"?
sapphicsnail 3mo ago
I'm really sad about it but I'm not going to renew Mullvad once the 6 months I already payed for are up. I'm fine supporting companies that have people with poliical views I initially interested in Mullvad for political reasons and one of the founders giving a significant amount of money to a political group that wants to restrict the rights of other people is too much for me. Not everyone is cynical. Some of us have actual values we act on.
- dijit 3mo ago
  Its worth considering that this is a left wing populist party that doesn’t like immigration, and what was actually said (the major controversy) is that even if you are born in Sweden, if you commit crimes and do not make any effort to be Swedish: you probably shouldn’t be here. How this is represented by people is different than that, and its hard for people who don’t speak Swedish to listen to the original sources, but be assured that in Sweden there is an actual party founded by Nazi sympathisers and it is the second most voted for party. I get not wanting to support someone you think has immoral views, but check the facts first before blacklisting a company that is filled with people trying to push for a more open, private yet transparent internet.

0xy 3mo ago

Only in Europe could a party with socialist-leaning values on every single issue except immigration be branded 'far right'. This is the case in every single European country for some reason. Marine Le Pen's party in France leans socialist on econ but is painted as 'far right' for the same reason.

slopinthebag 3mo ago
[flagged]
- OkayPhysicist 3mo ago
  Congrats on falling for hundred year old propaganda. Fascism loves dancing around in the flayed skin of the socialism it violently represses. Go look into what they did to trade unions if you think the Nazis were some Worker's Party.
  - slopinthebag 3mo ago
    The Nazi’s were National Socialists, which is very obviously different from Marxism-Leninism, and was/is a very specific kind of evil. You can’t divorce the National from the Socialism, and that’s not my goal. Go look into what the soviets did to trade unions.
    - dijit 3mo ago
      And the Democratic Peoples Republic Of Korea is super Democratic. https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists https://www.britannica.com/story/were-the-nazis-socialists

truthier 3mo ago

[flagged]

actionfromafar 3mo ago
[flagged]

truthier 3mo ago

[flagged]

viccis 3mo ago

I don't see how that particular political expression is a risk to their VPN's stance. This is a lot of nothing; would have been better to ignore the screeching from Bluesky.

m4xp 3mo ago
In fact I would argue that if he was cancelled like the mob wanted it would reflect badly on mullvad, If you cave to a bunch of Twitter warriors am I supposed to trust you from keeping my privacy when the government comes knocking?

_def 3mo ago

> We want to liken Mullvad to a force of nature. Or to cryptography. It just mechanically does its thing with no human arbiters. I can't even find the right words to describe how wrong this sounds to me

stego-tech 3mo ago

It’s Cloudflare and Stormfront all over again, at least from my perspective. As much as folks want to somehow find a way to separate a company from its leadership or founders, the reality is that giving money to Mullvad rewards someone who in turn gives their share of the money to, well, fascist scumbags. People need to understand taking that position is itself free speech. Nobody is saying he can’t give money to Nazis or fascists or some other problematic group, what we’re saying is that there are consequences for doing so. If Mullvad wanted to distance itself from these problematic positions or people, they could just buy them out and tell them to fuck off. That, too, is a perfectly valid response that doesn’t impugn upon anyone’s speech. The problem with people claiming to be pro-free speech or anti-censorship while supporting authoritarian regimes or ideologies is that the two are inherently in conflict: the absolute last thing a fascist actually wants is freedom of speech, and so hiding behind such a virtuous shield while directly contributing to groups whose goals would dismantle and destroy that shield wholesale is such a naked act of hypocrisy that anything else they say or do should be suspect. Mullvad’s position, much like Cloudflare’s before it, is that we must tolerate the intolerant, even though the goals of the intolerant are to exterminate tolerance. This is the sort of Middle School thought experiment that should be a no-brainer, yet here we are again. For a company like Mullvad, that undermines their core currency - trust - at a foundational level that’s impossible to reconcile.