When called out on it, they then doubled down on this dogshit take: https://archive.ph/quYyb
this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
1024 points (92.9% liked)
Proton
5514 readers
1690 users here now
Empowering you to choose a better internet where privacy is the default. Protect yourself online with Proton Mail, Proton VPN, Proton Calendar, Proton Drive. Proton Pass and SimpleLogin.
Proton Mail is the world's largest secure email provider. Swiss, end-to-end encrypted, private, and free.
Proton VPN is the world’s only open-source, publicly audited, unlimited and free VPN. Swiss-based, no-ads, and no-logs.
Proton Calendar is the world's first end-to-end encrypted calendar that allows you to keep your life private.
Proton Drive is a free end-to-end encrypted cloud storage that allows you to securely backup and share your files. It's open source, publicly audited, and Swiss-based.
Proton Pass Proton Pass is a free and open-source password manager which brings a higher level of security with rigorous end-to-end encryption of all data (including usernames, URLs, notes, and more) and email alias support.
SimpleLogin lets you send and receive emails anonymously via easily-generated unique email aliases.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
And you seem to have forgotten that Trump's Attorney General William Barr tried to force backdoors in encryption.
So shut the fuck up Andy, you're out of your element.
Trump doesn’t go after big tech to help the little guy. Trump goes after big tech to bring them to heel.
The dumbass CEO has fallen for the MAGA lie that these billionaires are working for the the “little people”. They work for no one but themselves and their loyalists.
What does ths forced backdoor have to do with the text you quoted?
Because Andy was saying something that people forget and OP is pointing out something Andy is forgetting? It is pointing out Andy's bias or ignorance to make Trump look good
Is it true though? Not sure it's the case: Lina Khan was nominated by Biden.
Yes. AG William Barr sought to force backdoors in encryption in 2019. You can read all about it in the article I linked to.
I think they were asking about the actions against big tech starting under Trump. My memory ain't what it used to be (& it was never very good), but even if something was started under Trump there have been various actions taken against big tech going at least as far back as the Internet Explorer near-monopoly days - so it's not exactly like they did anything new, special, or unprecedented.
EDIT: Can some kind soul take pity on me and explain why I'm getting downvoted, instead of just a hit & run? What did I get wrong?
Oh, don't bother! Sometimes it feels like even asking for people to explain their downvotes invites more downvotes for some inexplicable reason.
Without referring to the specific post in question, I have some comments about that.
Different people downvote for all sorts of different reasons. Some downvote if they disagree with a statement, some downvote because they don't like the way the statement is presented (eg. I often downvote posts with huge embedded memes, even if I like what the meme says); some downvote because they don't think the context is appropriate (even if they agree with the ideas said, they might be seen as the wrong time / place); some downvote due to a misunderstanding or perhaps an ambiguity in the post. etc. etc. And very often, posts with more than one idea in them are downvoted by people who agree with part of it but disagree with another part (even if the second part is minor and insignificant).
So then, if someone says something like "I'm being downvoted because xyz", they'll almost certainly be downvoted by a heap of people who had a different reason in mind. If a person says "show me where I'm wrong", that apparently ignores the other possible reasons for downvotes - and can sometimes imply arrogance and stubbornness - which of course will invite downvotes. And if someone just asks "why am I being downvoted?" it might be interpreted to mean "I don't deserve to be downvoted" - which of course will also invite more downvotes.
Thanks for laying it out. Yeah, I've thought about this and I do get it that we're all different. I wrote that out of exasperation from the inconsistency and just plain old pettiness that seems to underline some of those motives that leave people confused.
My criteria is: does this contribute to the conversation in any meaningful way and is it grounded? So to me things like downvoting because of some arbitrary reason that only serves the voter feels selfish and shallow and pointless. It's almost destructive, even, when previous voting scores hold some momentum and impact how the thread is perceived. For example, some folks have been downvoted to hell because someone misinterpreted their comment and replied with a popular opinion totally missing the point, framing the first person a moron but without critically looking into what they're saying beyond first the impression. (Man, I wish I could find that one exemplary thread easily.)
I know, I know, the points are made up and don't matter, but sometimes they mean something to those who receive them.
But anyway, thank you for your synthesis, you sound like a very smart cookie.
donvotes dont mean you're wrong. they mean you made someone mad. sometimes this is because you said something they know is incorrect. but more often its because what you said may be true, and disagrees with their worldview or ideology.
Very true. Funny how OP's comment was just referring to a completely different argument. Instead of answering the question if the argument brought by the Proton guy could by chance be true, they again referred to their derailing...
It's pretty rare for even entirely innocuous comments to have zero downvotes. It doesn't bother me but it is funny the things that some people will choose to get upset about.
Yes it's true. The Trump administration initiated the first major antitrust lawsuit against Google in 2020.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/20/justice-department-antitrust-case-google-430281
But it doesn't make up for the myriad of other shitty things he's done. Keeping Lina Kahn on would have been the absolute easiest way to assuage public concern, if he actually gave a fuck.
Or like, telling Musk and Zuck to get fucked.
Mostly I remember him getting angry at all the fact checking bots (election, Russia, etc) that Twitter, Facebook, and Google introduced and that was one of the ways to go after them.
I don't really care what the reason is, personally.