561–570 of 588 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they have pictures on their PCs they are. It's weird that you're arguing with this.
>If they have pictures on their PCs they are. If I have porn with men on my computer, it does not mean that I am gay or have raped men. Your reasoning is absurd.
... so what are you in the other scenario?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
tl;dr if you want your network to be private, maybe don’t pay a saas to do it. Your ISP already tracks ingress and egress.
This is really the unfortunate truth. >90% of global ISP's not only collect but also sell netflow metadata commercially. Nanosecond timestamps, packet sizes, source IPs, destination IP's. Doesn't matter what VPN provider you use, whether you're using Tor, how many residential proxies you're routing through via a complex proxychains config... commercial entities can correlate virtually all of it. Team Cymru is one suc…
Btw I2P provides imho decent amount of protection for timing and packet sniffing attacks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It will eventually cease to exist. I went to Grenada in 2014 and used offline maps to drive around the island. In 2015 the tablet suffered an accident and I powered it off to deal with it later. 5 years later I power it back on without internet connectivity. Turns out the maps expired. So much for many years
While I agree this is potentially an issue, most people with most devices won't be away from the internet for years. If you want it to be apocalypse proof for when the internet goes down you should probably get a paper map.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not necessarily. Making that statement, setting up in a country that has enough issues to make it plausible, and then not paying the bribe would also make a lot of sense. See also: no log VPNs that actually were logging. Worst case scenario they shut down, collaborate fully with the police and keep all the profits up til then. Better case scenario they make a deal with the police and keep operating and making profits…
Which vpn was no-log-but-logging? I was shopping around for an alternative after mullvad blocked port forwarding, but it seems like no one else is as trustworthy. Not that I need it for my “attempt to port forward smash ultimate from within crummy hospital internet” purposes, but hey, principle of the thing and all that.
AirVPN let you forward several ports (up to 20, if I remember correctly) and you can pick the port numbers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are many, many pedophiles out there. I'm also convinced of a conspiracy theory that a lot of dark web traffic and hosts are created/operated by secret parts of the gov to de-legitimize the need for anonymity. I believe this because it would be too easy with the access to that material and no oversight. Just muddy the waters so nothing in there looks worth protecting.
>There are many, many pedophiles If a person watches the CP - this does not mean that he is a pedophile. If a person watches the CP - this does not mean that he is a child abuser. Sharing CP != child abuse. Viewing CP != child abuse. Storing CP != child abuse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No disrespect, I use offline Google maps almost daily, but there are far far better offline hiking apps out there. Google will probably work ok for the most popular trails, and I guess you can use it as a supercharged compass. But at least in Europe, if you actually plan a route in any mountains based on Google, you're in for an adventure :)
What apps would you recommend?
Bit focused on eastern Europe, but has a hiking mode with very good coverage of the official routes (not only in eastern Europe ;)). And everything is free, including offline maps. Terrific value for casual trips.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bergfex.to...
This one is not free (there is a free tier though) but seems to have more details in some areas, so the pro tier may be worth it if you hike a lot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Looking at the scale of NordVPN they either already have a liason with aurhorities inside, or are hacked by authorities. Based on what? You just seem to be making a wild unsubstantiated conjecture here.
It's the perfect honeypot situation, isn't it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is really the unfortunate truth. >90% of global ISP's not only collect but also sell netflow metadata commercially. Nanosecond timestamps, packet sizes, source IPs, destination IP's. Doesn't matter what VPN provider you use, whether you're using Tor, how many residential proxies you're routing through via a complex proxychains config... commercial entities can correlate virtually all of it. Team Cymru is one suc…
Hell. Is that amount of global correlation even possible? What if I route through 7 countries? Surely the data of every single ISP on earth cannot be collected in the hands of a single entity? Btw I2P provides imho decent amount of protection for timing and packet sniffing attacks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That could not be further from the truth. There’s plenty of offensive speech that isn’t suppressed (personal insults, porn/other things that used to be considered “obscene”) and there’s plenty of inoffensive speech that is (spam, sometimes defamation).
No speech is suppressed where free speech is valued as a right, probably your case. You would find that porn and personal insults are not legal in many parts of the world. The Chinese government has adopted a zero-tolerance policy toward so-called sexual content. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pornography_in_China To them it is offensive therefore illegal. Again, protecting offensive speech is the point behind free sp…
> If speech is not offensive it wouldn't be suppressed
My point is that's not true, and it's trivial to find counterexamples. I listed a few in my comment.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> "especially when we offend" > This is a fundamental premise of freedom of speech and a large reason as to why it exists. I cringe whenever somebody makes this point. Offensive speech isn't even in the top 10 reasons to support free speech. It isn't a reason at all. Tolerating offensive speech is something we have to do to make free speech work, it's one of the "cons" not the "pros".
If speech is not offensive it wouldn't be suppressed therefore making the right to free speech irrelevant. You're free to say you like pickles over carrots in Saudi Arabia. Offensive doesn't necessarily mean demeaning of human rights.
Good speech is often considered offensive to some, so we must tolerate offensive speech in the name of free speech.
Offensive speech is not automatically good speech and offensive speech in and of itself isn't automatically worthy of broadcast.