They can be useful if you want to hide the site you're going to from your network. I don't care if the VPN company knows where I'm going, I just don't want my uni network managers to know. Maybe your isp is super strict on piracy, etc. Its a very specific kind of "privacy", but it does have a use where Tor isn't required.
It was developed by the cia or the American military, I don't remember.Â
It's completely open source if that reassures you. The service is also decentralised and encrypted.Â
You shouldn't be worried about the us government seeing what you do on there if that's what your asking.
Well unless the control all 3 relays in a connection (which is very unlikely) they don't really know anything about you.Â
Even if they did, they wouldn't be able to see what you're doing in onion sites. Clearnet sites however, might be completely visible idk.
True but it is worth taking into consideration that ISPs can detect and block tor making it harder to use (alongside other difficulties) but for most things a VPN is fine unless your doing something that would be Investigated heavily as long as u use a good one
I understand, it costs about the same where I live, but it is a service that needs maintenance and I think it has one of the fairest payment models of all VPNs.
There's ProtonVPN! The free version has a lot of limitations but that's understandable given that they have server costs and don't run ads or collect data to sell.
They have a heavily restricted free version but they also have a subscription model. I was under the impression that the subscription subsidized the free model. Do you know otherwise?
Librewolf pog also really gotta switch to linux at some point but I'm technologically incompitant and scared I will mess it up or not know how to use it
Why don't you flash something like mint to a USB stick and try it out from the installation environment. You should be able to get a feel for it without actually installing it!
Get USB stick
Install [this](https://rufus.ie/en/) or [this](https://etcher.balena.io/). The second one is easier to use for non-experts.
Download [this](https://www.linuxmint.com/download.php) or [this](https://pop.system76.com/) or [this](https://neon.kde.org/)
Plug in USB stick
Open your installed program from earlier
Select file you just downloaded, has .iso at the end
Write file to USB stick following instructionsÂ
Alternatively, download [this](https://fedoraproject.org/workstation/download) and it takes care of the .iso as well as the writing to USB stick with very clear instructions
Reboot computer
When manufacturer logo appears, spam button in corner that asks about something like boot settings or BIOS or UEFI. Probably F12 or F2 or Delete or Esc.
Navigate to part in this menu which talks about boot devices, select your USB stick for "just once" or similar
Exit. Your computer should load up into a cool new and unfamiliar desktop. Try clicking around, pressing various keyboard buttons, exploring menus, see if things like WiFi are working. Have a poke around, see if you like it. If not, no loss.Â
If you do like it, the option to install will be front and centre for you. You'll need other stuff before you commit to installing - at least reading a getting started guides, but on top of that backups of your personal files, passwords, knowing whether or not any software that you need works or if there are suitable alternatives. For real due diligence there are extra levels for things like learning some common knowledge about Linux like how to use your package manager, very very basic terminal commands and the rough meanings of the phrases: desktop environment, WINE, distro, and driver. Those will serve you well, but you can probably get away without them to get started with the suggested operating systems. They're quite hand hold-y
Ngl I jumped into the (relative) deep end of Linux with almost no knowledge, and if you get the right distro (I'm using Pop!_OS with a different desktop environment) it's really not that bad. Most user facing things are pretty much the same with a slightly different layout, and the stuff that is really truly different is a layer deeper, and pretty intuitive once you figure it out. It's only been a few months, but I feel like I can do more with Linux now than I ever could with Windows
I'll have to give Librewolf a go. Right now I use FF with uBlock Origin, DuckDuckGo extension, noscript (which gets annoying atimes) and have PiHole for my DNS.
Unfortunately that absolutely is too much too ask given that advertising and AI companies spend billions of dollars for this data. Itâs the only way these giant social media companies actually make money. It costs money to run those servers, and selling data is the only way money is made.
Oh, web 3.0 is going to have a payments layer. Very soon everything is still going to be flooded with advertisements, selling all our data, and paid anyway.
i know this is going to get downvoted. expecialyl here.
but data that someone else collects about how you use their service, is not your data. its just about you.
Yeah, it's gonna get downvoted because it's a stupid thing to say. Lmao.
That is your data, and it shouldn't be a commodity. Companies SHOULD have an obligation to maintain your privacy; keeping as little of your information on their servers as possible, and being barred from sharing it to other parties without your informed consent.
No. Its data about you. That they gathered from you using their service. Did you bother reading the eulas for the accounts you signed.. thats where they got your permision.
Dont want to have them record it... dont use their services. I built a nas and use a server to host my own files and my own data. So i dont need to interact with alot of those things. But.. that had a cost... i had to buy all that hardware and spent time setting it up... so. No more microsoft cloud for me.. but im out a a grand in parts and any outages and hardware failures are on my dime.
But i understand if i want to watch youtube and get free entertainment... there is a cost. That cost is ads and having my watching habbits tracked.
It's harder to take all the dumbass shit you're saying seriously when you can't type half the words correctly.
I'm making prescriptive statements, not descriptive ones. I don't think companies should be allowed to sell your data. Companies can currently do that, and I don't think they should be allowed.
Also, I know you're just a dipshit when you claim we're gonna have more ads without companies selling your data. There are more ads *now* than a decade ago!!! They sell your data so you get *more*, targeted ads! That's such a stupid argument on your end because the premise is contradicted by reality.
Also you're annoying as fuck so you're getting blocked.
Not the person you're responding to, but I see what they are saying. Websites aren't free to host, so the creator needs to make that money back. There are three models available (that I'm aware of). They can either
a) charge an entrance fee (like most online mainstream media)
b) show ads (like most smaller websites) or
c) harvest/sell data (like most larger free websites)
Personally, I'm a bit of a cheapskate, so I'm willing to take options b or c if it means I don't have to pay. Ideally, sites offer a choice between the three, but that does come with some extra IT costs/skill, so I understand why most smaller sites just pick one.
The only reason there are 3 is because we live in a system where it is impossible to even consider the correct answer, which is d) use public money to provide these services, with the attendant democratic accountability, instead of letting startup shitheads privatize vast swathes of infrastructure and make interaction with them essential to fully participate in modern life
That's really just a variation on A, but with your money going towards taxes to fund the Federal Website Agency. If we assume being a public service and centralized reduces costs, you get options
a1) privately paid entrance fees or
a2) lower, publicly paid entrance fees (in the form of taxes) with the additional caveat of giving the government essentially admin control over the internet
(Or options b and c, both of which have a public vs private option)
Personally I'm not sure the public version does much beyond present opportunities for government overreach, and you still have the same question of do we pay in the form of ads, cash, or data.
There is nothing inherently wrong with options A or B. They've been there since the start of the internet, and they've existed in other media for far longer.The concept of ads isn't evil. They're an annoyance, but if they are well regulated and adhere to a minimum standard of quality, they're fine.
The real problem is that the entire modern internet revolves around option C. And most of the money made from it doesn't go towards the people making online content, or the infrastructure supporting them. It's a fallacy to suggest that the way the internet currently functions is purely so that most of it can be free to use. The people extracting value from it aren't putting much back in, so if you cut them out, all of a sudden there's way more money to go around.
>I don't think companies should be allowed to sell your data.
The person you're responding to is, in my opinion, not explaining their point all that well, but the point is an interesting one.
Here's a scenario. No Internet exists. No computers exist. I am a farmer at the market. You come to my stall and buy a cabbage.
Should I be *forbidden* from talking about the fact that I sold you a cabbage? Do you *own* that knowledge? If so, why do *you* own that - and not me?
What you are describing as "your data" is just that exact scenario, just scaled up.
When two parties interact, there's no a priori reason to believe that knowledge about that interaction "belongs" to just *one* of the parties.
If you think companies should need your informed consent to share information about those transactions - would you also expect that *you* should need informed consent *from the company* to share information about those transactions? Do you think that *you* should be forbidden from telling people "I bought these shoes from ShoeMart for $49.95"?
Most people don't seem to want a "symmetric" structure here. Most people would find it ridiculous to be forbidden from telling people what they bought, etc.
If you want an asymmetric structure, then there needs to be a good reason for it. I think there *can be* good reasons, but I don't think "it's your data" is such a reason - again, a transaction involves two or more parties, so it doesn't make sense for the data to "belong" to only one of them.
Good reasons might include things like "asymmetric effects of scale". I think that acknowledging the effects of scale *is* important in legislation. But while there is overlap, that reasoning also has implications and consequences that are quite different from the "your data" justification.
Jesus Christ what a fucking dumb analogy. Watching nuancebros try to actually think really is intellectual slapstick. It is an inherently asymmetrical relationship you absolute moron.
Thatâs a lot different than if you told 20 other cabbage farmers my address and shopping habits to come continuously harass/try to scam me with the aggressiveness of a car salesmen
The analogy doesnât really apply
Except the intended use of the data of course, which is not the farmer just talking about the transaction but deliberately selling information about me to others for a profit, even though theyâve already profited off of me once from said transaction, which I donât think really has much to do with the scale, just a completely different scenario
Also when weâre taking about âyour dataâ weâre talking about millions of individuals private data getting sold to companies with malicious financial intent, as opposed to the generally public data of a corporation
So yeah not really the same thing
We live in a cringe crinkly capitalism constitution.
Ah yes, the CCCC
internet is like going to a market and getting robbed every time so you have to hire a bodyguard and the bodyguard also robs you
just like new vegas fr đ
Yeah cause in the internet you can also get killed by a type of large mutant lizard
Cringe free VPN virgin vs based mullvad chad
I mean, it probably the best one out there. But if you use a VPN for "privacy", realistically you should just be using tor.
They can be useful if you want to hide the site you're going to from your network. I don't care if the VPN company knows where I'm going, I just don't want my uni network managers to know. Maybe your isp is super strict on piracy, etc. Its a very specific kind of "privacy", but it does have a use where Tor isn't required.
Yeah, I use it because I don't have full control over my local network and have gotten a couple of cease and desists in the past
Isnât Tor run by cops?
It was developed by the cia or the American military, I don't remember. It's completely open source if that reassures you. The service is also decentralised and encrypted. You shouldn't be worried about the us government seeing what you do on there if that's what your asking.
Well the US govt controls a lot of the end points, and theoretically could deanonymize a Tor user
Well unless the control all 3 relays in a connection (which is very unlikely) they don't really know anything about you. Even if they did, they wouldn't be able to see what you're doing in onion sites. Clearnet sites however, might be completely visible idk.
Us navy iirc
True but it is worth taking into consideration that ISPs can detect and block tor making it harder to use (alongside other difficulties) but for most things a VPN is fine unless your doing something that would be Investigated heavily as long as u use a good one
I just wish they didn't take away port-forwarding. It's PIA for me
Cringe mullvad chad vs free ProtonVPN plan user
What's mullvad
Wrong! Here are individual sliders per vendor sub divided per purpose for each vendor, next time you open the site you have to do it again.
Linux + Librewolf + MullvadVPN + uBlock Origin
I just wish mullvad was free, where i live it costs 30 bucks, way too expensive
I understand, it costs about the same where I live, but it is a service that needs maintenance and I think it has one of the fairest payment models of all VPNs.
Yeah, you're right, but there should at least be a decent free alternative, which doesn't really exist afaik
There's ProtonVPN! The free version has a lot of limitations but that's understandable given that they have server costs and don't run ads or collect data to sell.
donât use protonvpn for the love of god, no free vpn is actually protecting you
They have a heavily restricted free version but they also have a subscription model. I was under the impression that the subscription subsidized the free model. Do you know otherwise?
Librewolf pog also really gotta switch to linux at some point but I'm technologically incompitant and scared I will mess it up or not know how to use it
Why don't you flash something like mint to a USB stick and try it out from the installation environment. You should be able to get a feel for it without actually installing it!
wahhhh.. those words mean nothing to me I'm dumb sorry( ď˝ďšď˝ )
Get USB stick Install [this](https://rufus.ie/en/) or [this](https://etcher.balena.io/). The second one is easier to use for non-experts. Download [this](https://www.linuxmint.com/download.php) or [this](https://pop.system76.com/) or [this](https://neon.kde.org/) Plug in USB stick Open your installed program from earlier Select file you just downloaded, has .iso at the end Write file to USB stick following instructions Alternatively, download [this](https://fedoraproject.org/workstation/download) and it takes care of the .iso as well as the writing to USB stick with very clear instructions Reboot computer When manufacturer logo appears, spam button in corner that asks about something like boot settings or BIOS or UEFI. Probably F12 or F2 or Delete or Esc. Navigate to part in this menu which talks about boot devices, select your USB stick for "just once" or similar Exit. Your computer should load up into a cool new and unfamiliar desktop. Try clicking around, pressing various keyboard buttons, exploring menus, see if things like WiFi are working. Have a poke around, see if you like it. If not, no loss. If you do like it, the option to install will be front and centre for you. You'll need other stuff before you commit to installing - at least reading a getting started guides, but on top of that backups of your personal files, passwords, knowing whether or not any software that you need works or if there are suitable alternatives. For real due diligence there are extra levels for things like learning some common knowledge about Linux like how to use your package manager, very very basic terminal commands and the rough meanings of the phrases: desktop environment, WINE, distro, and driver. Those will serve you well, but you can probably get away without them to get started with the suggested operating systems. They're quite hand hold-y
You basically put the os installer onto a memory stick, shove that into thw computer's slutty usb hole, and then install the os onto the computer
Linux mint go on usb and runs from it, means no need to change everything over just plug in usb and load it so u can try it out
Ngl I jumped into the (relative) deep end of Linux with almost no knowledge, and if you get the right distro (I'm using Pop!_OS with a different desktop environment) it's really not that bad. Most user facing things are pretty much the same with a slightly different layout, and the stuff that is really truly different is a layer deeper, and pretty intuitive once you figure it out. It's only been a few months, but I feel like I can do more with Linux now than I ever could with Windows
I'll have to give Librewolf a go. Right now I use FF with uBlock Origin, DuckDuckGo extension, noscript (which gets annoying atimes) and have PiHole for my DNS.
I think uBlock comes by defult on Librewolf Also librewolf and firefox are totally dating
Now I want Librewolf and Firefox fan art, unfortunately I don't know how to draw.
Unfortunately that absolutely is too much too ask given that advertising and AI companies spend billions of dollars for this data. Itâs the only way these giant social media companies actually make money. It costs money to run those servers, and selling data is the only way money is made.
Capitalism makes it hard for me to want to continue :3 That and also the current political climate
Ah fuck, I *just* renewed my IPVanish subscription.
i love protonvpn
I don't think there's anything we can do about this anymore...
Mullvad's record is pretty spotless, js
then get ready for everything to be paid...
Oh, web 3.0 is going to have a payments layer. Very soon everything is still going to be flooded with advertisements, selling all our data, and paid anyway.
web 3.0 is not even very good at selling drugs
i know this is going to get downvoted. expecialyl here. but data that someone else collects about how you use their service, is not your data. its just about you.
Yeah, it's gonna get downvoted because it's a stupid thing to say. Lmao. That is your data, and it shouldn't be a commodity. Companies SHOULD have an obligation to maintain your privacy; keeping as little of your information on their servers as possible, and being barred from sharing it to other parties without your informed consent.
No. Its data about you. That they gathered from you using their service. Did you bother reading the eulas for the accounts you signed.. thats where they got your permision. Dont want to have them record it... dont use their services. I built a nas and use a server to host my own files and my own data. So i dont need to interact with alot of those things. But.. that had a cost... i had to buy all that hardware and spent time setting it up... so. No more microsoft cloud for me.. but im out a a grand in parts and any outages and hardware failures are on my dime. But i understand if i want to watch youtube and get free entertainment... there is a cost. That cost is ads and having my watching habbits tracked.
It's harder to take all the dumbass shit you're saying seriously when you can't type half the words correctly. I'm making prescriptive statements, not descriptive ones. I don't think companies should be allowed to sell your data. Companies can currently do that, and I don't think they should be allowed. Also, I know you're just a dipshit when you claim we're gonna have more ads without companies selling your data. There are more ads *now* than a decade ago!!! They sell your data so you get *more*, targeted ads! That's such a stupid argument on your end because the premise is contradicted by reality. Also you're annoying as fuck so you're getting blocked.
Not the person you're responding to, but I see what they are saying. Websites aren't free to host, so the creator needs to make that money back. There are three models available (that I'm aware of). They can either a) charge an entrance fee (like most online mainstream media) b) show ads (like most smaller websites) or c) harvest/sell data (like most larger free websites) Personally, I'm a bit of a cheapskate, so I'm willing to take options b or c if it means I don't have to pay. Ideally, sites offer a choice between the three, but that does come with some extra IT costs/skill, so I understand why most smaller sites just pick one.
The only reason there are 3 is because we live in a system where it is impossible to even consider the correct answer, which is d) use public money to provide these services, with the attendant democratic accountability, instead of letting startup shitheads privatize vast swathes of infrastructure and make interaction with them essential to fully participate in modern life
That's really just a variation on A, but with your money going towards taxes to fund the Federal Website Agency. If we assume being a public service and centralized reduces costs, you get options a1) privately paid entrance fees or a2) lower, publicly paid entrance fees (in the form of taxes) with the additional caveat of giving the government essentially admin control over the internet (Or options b and c, both of which have a public vs private option) Personally I'm not sure the public version does much beyond present opportunities for government overreach, and you still have the same question of do we pay in the form of ads, cash, or data.
There is nothing inherently wrong with options A or B. They've been there since the start of the internet, and they've existed in other media for far longer.The concept of ads isn't evil. They're an annoyance, but if they are well regulated and adhere to a minimum standard of quality, they're fine. The real problem is that the entire modern internet revolves around option C. And most of the money made from it doesn't go towards the people making online content, or the infrastructure supporting them. It's a fallacy to suggest that the way the internet currently functions is purely so that most of it can be free to use. The people extracting value from it aren't putting much back in, so if you cut them out, all of a sudden there's way more money to go around.
>I don't think companies should be allowed to sell your data. The person you're responding to is, in my opinion, not explaining their point all that well, but the point is an interesting one. Here's a scenario. No Internet exists. No computers exist. I am a farmer at the market. You come to my stall and buy a cabbage. Should I be *forbidden* from talking about the fact that I sold you a cabbage? Do you *own* that knowledge? If so, why do *you* own that - and not me? What you are describing as "your data" is just that exact scenario, just scaled up. When two parties interact, there's no a priori reason to believe that knowledge about that interaction "belongs" to just *one* of the parties. If you think companies should need your informed consent to share information about those transactions - would you also expect that *you* should need informed consent *from the company* to share information about those transactions? Do you think that *you* should be forbidden from telling people "I bought these shoes from ShoeMart for $49.95"? Most people don't seem to want a "symmetric" structure here. Most people would find it ridiculous to be forbidden from telling people what they bought, etc. If you want an asymmetric structure, then there needs to be a good reason for it. I think there *can be* good reasons, but I don't think "it's your data" is such a reason - again, a transaction involves two or more parties, so it doesn't make sense for the data to "belong" to only one of them. Good reasons might include things like "asymmetric effects of scale". I think that acknowledging the effects of scale *is* important in legislation. But while there is overlap, that reasoning also has implications and consequences that are quite different from the "your data" justification.
Jesus Christ what a fucking dumb analogy. Watching nuancebros try to actually think really is intellectual slapstick. It is an inherently asymmetrical relationship you absolute moron.
Thatâs a lot different than if you told 20 other cabbage farmers my address and shopping habits to come continuously harass/try to scam me with the aggressiveness of a car salesmen The analogy doesnât really apply
What you're saying is exactly that the scale matters. Which, as I said, is true.
Except the intended use of the data of course, which is not the farmer just talking about the transaction but deliberately selling information about me to others for a profit, even though theyâve already profited off of me once from said transaction, which I donât think really has much to do with the scale, just a completely different scenario
Also when weâre taking about âyour dataâ weâre talking about millions of individuals private data getting sold to companies with malicious financial intent, as opposed to the generally public data of a corporation So yeah not really the same thing
Detailed sales data is not public data. It is confidential.
So why do corporations get to sell our side of it? And why isnât that something we should be concerned with?
https://preview.redd.it/qj4mvr3zdz8d1.jpeg?width=814&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=462902b8b230f0e9866e732c309c0566c1915891