Mullvad VPN: Banned TV Ad in the Streets of London [video]

> And how much "surveillance" does a VPN prevent anyway?

Changing your acc number every other month and paying anonymously is much easier on Mullvad than on the ISP level. You can also get multiple people on the number very easily. And Mullvad is likely an entity outside of your home country, hence more difficult to coerce than your ISP.

In my eyes ISPs are compromised by default so the aim is to guard against them, if Mullvad is also as compromised it's more difficult for them to track me across account numbers and, even if they do, my data is then in another country, which worries me less than it being local since I'm not important enough to warrant international action.

FYI link is below, for the off-chance someone is curious.

(not sure what are the unwritten rules of self-promotion here, but hopefully providing a link in a sub-comment instead of the comment itself makes it okay-ish?)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qI3xj9cM0jk

I'm German. Punishing people for holocaust denial is exactly the right thing to do. There is no reason to deny that the holocaust has happened, because it has happened.

We don't see this as censorship, it's a safeguard against an ideology that destroyed democracy.

It's only "solved" if the solution is actually happening.

I'm sorry to say but that's ignorant bullshit. Freedom, not only of speech, but of expression and information, is enshrined in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, the major legal document of the EU; whence I quote:

Article 11 - Freedom of expression and information

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

2. The freedom and pluralism of the media shall be respected.

https://fra.europa.eu/en/eu-charter/article/11-freedom-expre...

The link above clarifies that this article corresponds to article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights (a legal document of the Council of Europe, a different body than the EU, whose members are a strict subset of the members of the CoE). Article 10 delimits restrictions to the right of expression, as follows:

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary."

And as the article points out, those restrictions apply to article 11 freedoms also, acting as an upper bound:

Pursuant to Article 52(3) of the Charter, the meaning and scope of this right are the same as those guaranteed by the ECHR. The limitations which may be imposed on it may therefore not exceed those provided for in Article 10(2) of the Convention, without prejudice to any restrictions which Community competition law may impose on Member States' right to introduce the licensing arrangements referred to in the third sentence of Article 10(1) of the ECHR.

In other words, yes, there is freedom of "speech", a.k.a expression, in the EU and it, and its limits, are enshrined in law.

I hate to make assumptions but there are a few public figures from the US that have argued that "Europe" has no freedom of speech like the brave US, like Paul Graham and Elon Musk, but they're talking out of their backsides.