Now that Protonmail is banning accounts for violating their "rules", isn't encrypting emails and sucks, what are some better alternatives?
>>62390848Just host your own faggot
This rumor is too easily being believed.https://protonmail.com/blog/transparency-report/That said, alternatives would be welcome for generally spreading the eggs over multiple baskets.
>>62391095How fast is it and does it have a mobile app?
>>62391117>does it have a mobile app???It's called IMAP and SMTP.
>>62390848Did you know that they have been routing all traffic through Mossad servers for almost two years now?
>>62391152But does it? Proton has a mobile app and that's why I use it.
>>62391305Yeah, it has hundreds. Use any normal email client and it'll work.
>>62391006>Proton Technologies AG may also sometimes act upon other types of requests. If presented with overwhelming evidence that the account in question is being used for illegal purposes against our Terms and Conditions, we will shut down the offending account immediately.According to your link pic related is "overwhelming evidence".Protonmail admin clearly indicates it is for SJW users a.k.a. the virtue signalling blogosphere, if you aren't one of them, prepare to get banned for as simple as "hate speech" even if it entirely isn't.
>>62390848>isn't encrypting emailsFalse.They're "anti-nazi" like many other companies, but no need to lie.
>>62390848ليلة الدخلةليلة الدخلة عرافية
>>62391006Hahahhahaha sup Protonmail shill.Why are you guys dodging the question? You didn't refute or explain it. I was trying to get a reply from you shills on your website and on protonmail's subreddit because you have a "official" representative there. Every time, you avoid answering it and you provide a link to some bullshit that's not answering the question.
>>62391498> >isn't encrypting emails> False.> They're "anti-nazi" like many other companies, but no need to lie.Wow you get an option to encrypt sent mails to other Protonmail users only. Fuck off. It should encrypt everything.>>62391117There's a mobile app but you can only use one account on it. There's support for desktop clients like Thunderbird but you have to pay Protonmail to use it.
Their encryption is end-to-end so they cant read messages which no other competitors offers. They've disabled one account out of 3 million so far for a group that rallied and ended up killing someone. To say that they no longer encrypt and will shut you down for SJW reasons based on these known facts is just trolling.
>>62393753That woman died of a heart attack because she was morbidly obese, she wasn't run over by no car
>>62390848Why do the mods allow the same crappy threads to be posted every couple of hours. I don't get it?We did this topic to death only a little while ago.
>>62394171The shills gotta collect their shekels
>>62391260Absolutely false. kyshttps://protonmail.com/support/knowledge-base/protonmail-israel-radware/
>>62393753>They've disabled one account ... for a group that rallied and ended up killing someone.Wrong.>for SJW reasonsThey called the group behind that slogan ("You will not replace us") a hate group. That's kinda SJW-y.They even said they could remove users if not doing so would hurt their image. That makes their virtue signalling on Twitter pretty obvious.I'm not an anti-Protonmail shill, though. They're still a better option than most providers. But facts are facts.
>>62391095Problem is they do not encrypt the email on the server.
>>62391305K9 mail, or do you use an iPhone?
>>62395048Server-side email encryption is largely a sham anyway:https://moxie.org/blog/lavabit-critique/Any time the server decides to start reading your email, they can. Your trust model is not changed at all by them encrypting your email.
>>62395133Yes, but it beats having the emails unencrypted. What are the minimum requirements to trust a service provider with your emails?(Yes, Google / NSA can read them anyway, irrespective of the provider. I just want some basic privacy at least.)
>>62395048server-side encryption is entirely irrelevant and emails were never conceived for confidentiality to begin with. 100% of your recipients' servers are unencrypted. you're lucky enough if the server-2-server transmission is encrypted (hopefully this has been almost universally implemented to prevent mitm)
>>62395218>Yes, but it beats having the emails unencrypted.Not when it's done through the server encrypting them for you. It makes no difference; you're still blindly trusting them. Basic privacy is achieved by a legally binding promise not to spy on you, and by you using actual end-to-end encryption.
>>62395218>Yes, but it beats having the emails unencrypted.No.>>62394646>>62394742
>>62395263So you would recommend Kolab? Mailfence is also OK and cheap.
>>62395322>Mailfence is also OK and cheap.closed source, Fourteen Eyes
>>62395360Any other services that you would recommend? I went through the The One Privacy Guy's list, and Kolab seemed best.
>>62395404Search: StartPage or DuckDuckGoIM: Signal or a good XMPP provider (you can also host your own)In general, use self-hosted solutions like NextCloud as much as you can.
>>62395446Thanks for the info currently I self-host NextCloud for cloud / webdav / caldav and got OpenSMTPD running (relay via ISP so not blacklisted, also DKIM, etc., set up).Considering setting up SOGo or some other package. Support for some packages is just bit crappy on OpenBSD.
is Startmail good?
>>62395446>Search: StartPage or DuckDuckGoQwant.>IM: Signal or a good XMPP provider (you can also host your own)Telegram, realistically speaking.>NextCloudif it's not physically at your disposal (i.e. remote VPS) it's largely indistinguishable from any other botnet. Just use the "cloud" as a commodity not as a backup solution, eventually encfs can be added on top of it easily.
>>62395526>if it's not physically at your disposal (i.e. remote VPS) it's largely indistinguishable from any other botnet.Very good point. The risk of a malicious VPS is just as serious as the risk with any other service provider. A home server is much safer, but unfortunately it's tough to do with email because you'll get blocked with a residential connection.
>>62392595>Wow you get an option to encrypt sent mails to other Protonmail users only. Fuck off. It should encrypt everything.How do you think PGP encryption actually works dumbass? You can encrypt your e-mails to anyone - as long as you do one of two things:You have their public key that you encrypt your e-mail withorYou use Protonmail's "premium" feature where you can use pre-shared password to encrypt the e-mail (give it to them in person or over Signal or something, idk) and then your recipient can use that PSK to decrypt the e-mail you sent them regardless of whether they're using g-mail or outlook or yahoo or fucking their own server.I feel like you actually don't understand how e-mail encryption works.
>>62391305the reason why technology is such a shitshow nowadays, everyone
>>62395690Yes it's laughable, especially when they bring up those morons who got caught on tor for using their real names online.
>>62395690>Classic NSA modus operandi>implying that any any business in Switzerland doesn't co-operate with XKEYSCORE, MARINA and UPPERCASE
>>62395690thiscould also be ProtonMail competitors spreading fake news in hopes of stealing some market share
For fucks sake I use protonmail for my important stuff.
What do you think about vmail?
>2017>people STILL think "secure email" can ever exist
>>62395276>do you think a baker is required to make a cake for a gay couple if they request one?No, just like protonmail doesn't have to provide an email service to people who advocate violence.
>>62395690>>62396260NSA didn't point a gun and make Protonmail going SJW
>>62391447>"Hospitalize people you don't agree with">Not hatespeechlul
>>62396508>doesn't have to provide an email service to people who advocate violence.No private company has a legal obligation to provide anything to anyone. Not an argument to anything.
>>62396680>Have dumbfuck friends>Suffer the consequences No sympathy from me desu.
>>62396663Yeah, that's exactly my point.
>>62396733>My point is not argument to anything.Excellent
>>62396754mods are removing posts ITT lad
why exactly shouldn't i just use thunderbird? it works fine and i'm not a sexual predator
>>62396712I don't see the problem. All your shit is encrypted anyway and you can pay them by sending the money by mail if you want. If they have no idea who you are and can't decrypt your data, they can't hand anything over.
>>62391447the guy publicly posted his email while he was bragging about selling guns and drugsprotonmail bans him cause it viotales TOS and anons thinks this is bad
>>62390848Why exactly do you fa/g/lings want encrypted email? I understand wanting to avoid Gmail, but what are you sending? Nudies? Super-secret plans? Nuclear codes? Why do you care?
>>62396908I use my email to verify my shopping and video game accounts, it CANNOT be compromised!
>I literally think i'm important enough for my email security to matter
>>62396908>Why do you care?>Falling for the nothing to hide meme
>>62396908Why don't you post some of your private emails here? Do you have something to hide?Why allow anyone access to your shit who doesn't need it?
>>62396822> All your shit is encrypted anywayServer-side encryption is 100% irrelevant. You have to trust their words like any other guy, and they they will compel to any Court order coming from any 14-eyes-friendly country.>they have no idea who you are and can't decrypt your dataIt's 100% their own statement again on a server-side config about both their payment and mail storage methods. If it's not client-side it's always, invariably, useless rhetorical gimmick.
>>62396934Word. Now is it true that Protonmail is cucked or is that false? I hate Google too and want to use something else.
>>62396960t. cocklet google goober gobbler
>>62396962There's a difference between private and encrypted, my affable negrance. I understand privacy, encryption is a step further though.>>62396973See above bruv. Don't get me wrong, I despise Google and their prying, but why do you need encryption? I'm not saying you don't, I'm just curious what your reason is.
>>62397068>I understand privacy, encryption is a step further though.>You can have online privacy without ecryption>I understand privacyApparently you don't.
>>62397029not an argument
>>62397013Sure you have to trust them about the server side encryption, but they really have no reason to deceive you. Everything else doesn't matter then.As for the payment, if you pay by mail they couldn't find out who you are if they wanted. No need to trust them there.
>>62397068Do you feel more comfortable about some hacker's or NSA employee's prying than Google's?
>>62397106>but they really have no reason to deceive you.not an argument.> Everything else doesn't matter then.what matters is only what happens client-side. That's why services like protonmail,tutanota and the forgotten darkmail where crafted: sadly they ultimately fail as soon as they want to be interoperable with every other mail server out there.Problem is, mail was never. meant. to be. private.>As for the payment, if you pay by mail they couldn't find out who you are if they wanted. no, there's always the creation of a code and the whole process "randomization" process is AGAIN 100% their own statement. Please note that anyway this "anonymization" involves just who payed for what. Not that firstname.lastname@example.org is located on server X, shelf #2.
>>62397193>there's always the creation of a codeI still don't see how they'd know my identity from that?
>>62391498>anti-NaziLiterally everyone is a "Nazi" nowadays. It's used so broadly that it's laughable. A pro-white group or website isn't automatically "Nazi".
>>62397251it's a process they CLAIM they have invented, they CLAIM they apply consistently and that they CLAIM will make those payment almost anonymous (and then they tell you that if you pay with paypal you're anonymous for them already... all of this is yet another security circus if you're not using cash in mail)at the end of it, all those CLAIMS don't mean jack shit when a Court order from a 14-eyes State arrives; they know that e mail address X is stored on server Y; they'll be able to decrypt everything on demand. They also have the ability to intercept and the like.
>>62397100Stop trying to make this about gay marriage. >>62397162No, but the NSA definitely has the ability to break encryption m8. They don't advertise that shit, but their budget is in the unknown trillions. They know how to break it.
>>62397593>the NSA definitely has the ability to break encryptionhaha
>>62397635You must be one of the stupid ones.
>>62397672>pls explain math to me
>>62397730Alright my man, keep laughing until one day a missile flies up your anus.
>>62397672NSA can't break good crypto, not that they need to. They have all kind of backdoors and tampering already in place
>>62397828This is also true. They don't need to decrypt the message. They just find the IP/Mac address and install keylogger. This is the least sophisticated option imo.
Reported everyone here for cp
use cock.li instead protonmail holds bias and doesnt respect the privacy of everyone
>>62390848You deserve it, we told you never to trust those filthy kikes, yet still want to get raped by jews.
>>62390848I don't understand where does this anti Protonmail shills come from and what's the point of it.I mean, it's not like anyone wants you there, no one is begging you to use their service.But hey, believe what you want.
>>62391498That doesn't really clear things up since even right-libertarian like myself are considered Nazis for being to the right of Karl Marx and Fredrich Engels.
needs IMAP or POP>inb4 their proprietary app they have only in beta
So you're telling me that since the mail is client side encrypted, they can't even look at the data so they simply just ban you based on your email address looking suspicious?Verily I chortled.So anyway, what's the next best paid email service to get?Tuta? Kolab? Startmail?
>>62396812>He can't tell the difference between an e-mail client and an e-mail providerThe absolute state of /g/
tutanotacock.limail.ruthe best is of course to host your own
>>62396580Do you live inside a /pol/ bubble? How is it 'sjw' to refuse service to someone who blatantly breaks the rules established by the service provider years ago? Does this acronym even mean anything anymore?
>>62403234It's "SJW" if you virtue signal it on Twitter.
>>62397593What if I told you that even with 100 trillion dollars, it would not be possible for you to come up with a way to break AES?
>Discover ProtonMail JUST today.>Kind of limited on free accounts but still neat.>"Awesome! End to end encryption! Guess I can finally move away from gmail.">/g/ finds faults in it.God, I just want to know if it's reasonably secure or not. What other alternatives are there anyway?
>>62403431>"Awesome! End to end encryption!Do you know how this works? You only have end to end between existing protonmail emails. Most people don't use it, and thus send with plaintext.
>>62390848Is /g/ being raided by /pol/? First it's dozens of threads rallying against Firefox, because "sjw", then it's Intel because "jews" and now Protonmail again because "sjw". You're constantly ranting about refugees and how people should stay within their own borders, preserving their culture, yet you're spreading like a disease, leaking everywhere without any regard for board culture and people wanting to actually discuss the topic of the given board. Have you no shame? Are you so ignorant of your own behavior?
>>62403523A bit. It's the same for Signal on Android, so yeah I get it.So what do we use?
>>624035294chan has been overrun by /pol/ niggers, it's fucked. If you want to have any meaningful discussion about technology without losing half of your braincells you'll have to look elsewhere.
>>62391447I simply don't understand why the company created a service with amoral technology like encryption then decided to fuck users over with bullshit like that without even having an excuse like being ordered by some judge. Do they have shit in their brains? They can't choose who encryption protects; the same encryption that protects upstanding people will protect the criminal, and that's fine. Why do they have to go out of their way to ban people based on a picture
cock.li domain names are lulzy420blaze.it
>>62403565because the picture called for violence against other people based on their political ideology, which is illegaland then they lost plausible deniability when others tweeted pictures of it towards them, forcing them to take action
>>62396829That's post-election 4chan for you. All you have to do is express some right-wing sentiment and these tards will overlook any level of stupidity to unconditionally be on your side.
go with cock.li imo
>>62403604Nobody "forced" them to take action. Some tweets don't force anyone to do anything. Maybe if these tweeter people were actually affected by this, they would have thought they were sufficiently wronged and that suing the email company was warranted; only then a court order might have been issued.Instead of shutting up, staying put and waiting for the judges to work it out, they decided to undermine the whole point of their own service.
>>62390848encrypt it yourself.
>>62390848>do illegal shit>break the ToS>whaaaaa they are banning megrow up
>>62390883I own a domain and my ISP allows hosting servers at home (even gives out free static IPs). How much effort does selfhosting mail require and is there any reason to not do it?
>>62405505>illegalExcept it isn't. Even if it is, why the fuck are the admin playing judges? They even called it hate group, which is completely irrelevant to it being legal or illegal, and they even admit they made the ban without evidence. This is a matter of they think they can play SJW policing under the disguise of banning "stuff they rule illegal".Fuck you and fuck them.
>>62405212>encrypt mail for yourself>your peer doesn't use encryption (99.99% chance)>PROFIT!!!!>>62405505>do illegal shit>no one has been found to do something illegal in any country>no one has been found breaking any ToSI love how these kind of posts end up pretending to be mature.>>62405688>my ISP allows hosting servers at home (even gives out free static IPs).If you're paying $$$ or €€€ for a static business IP, I'm surprised you didn't do this before.>How much effortDon't believe faggots telling you otherwise: _curating_ constantly a mail server in a safe way constantly and in your premises is a PITA. Yet again it may be ok for you if you're just having a few addresses for you and your relatives.>is there any reason to not do it?it's honestly a futile gimmick. Your mail WILL end unencrypted and snoopable on servers worldwide. >>62403867It has already been posted and replied.
>>62405883>Even if it is, why the fuck are the admin playing admins?Because it's their private company, and they are the admins. They don't need a reason, it's their site. They have a good reason this time though, inciting violence probably is, or at least should be, illegal.
>>62407537Why the fuck are admins detectives?Why the fuck would they think the picture is real just from a picture? Anyone can fucking make a fake poster, and you can put any email in it and it would still be fake, the admins are fucking virtue signalling their political agenda, it is clear as the fucking day and it is clear they are power tripping and stepping over the fucking lines, there is no fucking excuse for their fucking SJW policing period.>private companyFuck them for fucking over the one thing they claim to be different about. They have proven to be just as shit, if not worse.
>>62407537>It's their own site!See >>62396663>They have a good reason this time though, inciting violence probably is, or at least should be, illegal.Wishful thinking, and slippery slope. https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23270
>>62407680>Why the fuck are admins detectives?They're not. They're admins. They are doing their job. >Anyone can fucking make a fake posterSure, but it wasn't a fake poster. It was a real poster that was inciting violence against people you happen to not agree with. >virtue signalling their SJW political agendakek, loving the buzzwords mate, really makes me think.
>>62407756>It was a real posterNo it wasn't. Prove me wrong.
>>62407713Not sure what your point is mate. You can agree or disagree that inciting violence is wrong. Either way I don't see why protonmail, or any other private company for that matter, should care about your opinion.
>>62407769The picture is the proof. Prove to me it's a shop.
>>62407783>inciting violenceIt was not a real poster, it was a commie who printing the poster, put it up, then took a picture of it.Easiest way to get someone banned.
>>62407756>>virtue signalling their SJW political agenda>kek, loving the buzzwords mate, really makes me think.They are virtue signalling, though. If not, they would just ban the guy like they ban many others (spammers) and don't even mention it.But when they post it on Twitter it becomes virtue signalling.
>>62407825That is quite the claim you're making there, surely you have evidence to support it?
>>62407862Your evidence of a photo of a poster doesn't support anything, anyone can fake this photo, because Protonmail admin don't care about evidence, they only care about feelings and virtue signalling to their friends, they banned the email anyway just so they can tweet about it.I can make some evidence of someone printing out the poster then putting it up on a wall and take a picture about it, they would still ban the email because it has "hate group slogan" that they clearly have to virtue signal against, it is too good an opportunity to miss.
>>62390848https://www.fsf.org/resources/webmail-systemsWhat about these?
>>62407783>Either way I don't see why protonmail, or any other private company for that matter, should care about your opinion.Poor wording. If you're suggesting that protonmail, or any other private company, should not care about anyone opinion, that's exactly what I wrote.If you're suggesting that _mine_ is an opinion and _your_ wishful thinking + slippery slope isn't an opinion, you're wrong and there's no point arguing if we aren't having a logic discussion.If you're suggesting that _their_ opinion matters and nothing else, that's not an argument to anything. Obviously a private company is not legally obliged to give out any service to any one (with some corner case exceptions).
>>62407850>Your evidence of a photo of a poster doesn't support anythingYes it does. It supports my claim that the email address in question was inciting violence. >anyone can fake this photoextraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. You have provided exactly 0.
>>62407784>Send resume>"you may contact me at email@example.com"
Hey guys, we need no laws or judicial system anymore, protonmail will judge for us what is legal and what is not. Based on twitter evidence.Or just dont use services that base their business plan on pandering to "literally hitler trump and evil nazis everywhere" demographics. Applies to both sides, as soon as climate in society changes, they will dump you exactly as fast as they dumped "literally hitlers, nazis and hate speakers", most likely along with all your personal data. But dont mind me, I might as well be nazi, suburban and rural retard or even russian who is responsible for hillery not being 50 points ahead.
>>62407862>surely you have evidence to support it?I love how burden of proof is always reversed when we enter in SJW territory.
>>62408013>If you're suggesting that _their_ opinion matters and nothing else, that's not an argument to anything.Yes it is. It's an argument to my claim that they are doing nothing wrong by banning people that incite violence. >Obviously a private company is not legally obliged to give out any service to any oneExactly. So maybe stop crying about it?
>>62408054Even vc, admin of meme email site cock.li, only banned an account that was used by the Equifax hackers after someone forwarded him an email sent from the account that proved that they actually controlled that email, because literally everyone can just put an email address anywhere.
>>62408054A photo on twitter is not evidence of anything.
>>62408083>I don't understand how burden of proof works. ok brainlet.
>>62408111>Stop cryingAh, the "I'm a mature person" posting.It can't be helped.
>>62395690>>62395749>>62395976The NSA isn't that stupid, anon. Proton mail has legitimately reached critical mass and the likelihood it's been compromised is high. Security through obscurity only applies to open-source software. Since protonmail isn't open-source, there's no way to verify any of their claims. Nor are they transparent or contain a warrant canary. The fact there's even a "discussion" (see: normies pretending to understand something by posturing between enlightened and absolutely retarded) is all the evidence I need to know it's time to jump ship. Or rather, no one should have jumped on this ship because there's absolutely no good reason to use protonmail except if you're gullible and trust others to do your research for you. Protonmail hasn't been audited, and again is closed source, so there's no way to verify claims. There's also the old tradition of private services (like the alternative protocols) adopting a "everything goes" stance. You see this with things like Freenet and Tor. You can't pick and choose. Either you allow everything or you're not a service that fits into that field. It's just another email server with good marketing, apps (if you use a smartphone AND you use email on your smartphone you should leave this thread and /g/. You are a bandwagoning idiot), and slightly better security. Secure, private, and anonymous email comes at a huge cost. Something as easy as protonmail cannot ever be all three. If you legitimately have reason to use purely secure email, I implore you to research PGP, the family of onion-based routing protocols, attack vectors for phones and computers, and OPSEC. And for the love of G*d don't believe anything anyone says, ever. Not even me. Don't put your trust into anyone, because the only people who will really care about your privacy/anonymity/etc. the most are you, yourself. Do your own research and form your own opinion. Discussion brings nothing to the table, but wasted time.
>>62408116Yes it is. Evidence and 100% watertight proof are not the same thing. The latter is also not possible outside of math.
>>62408142Ah, the 'I'm butthurt, pls no bully' posting. It can't be helped.
>>62408145As an aside, you judge a points importance by the level of bike shedding it contains, and the level of legitimacy, by the fervour its detractors display. The more bike shedding, i.e lots of discussion, the less important. The people who know anything are not discussing anything. They are doing things, likely with the knowledge they've perceived to be true and not from long-winded discussion. And the more fervour either side has, the more you can judge where the point is coming from. Usually an emotional or too-quick detractor is coming from a lower level of thought than truth. Most likely is emotion, but money and idealism is also a good motivator. Trust no one. Verify everything yourself. Stop wasting time.
>>62408186Nothing "butthurt" on my side. Re-read >>62408013I've tried my best to remain logical and neutral. No discussion can be entertained when someone pretends to act mature adopting slippery slopes as a basis for any argument.Posts like "grow up" and "stop crying" and so on are the ultimate ennui shitposting.
>>62408155Just saying, the claim that a clear and in focus photograph is fake, is a claim that requires evidence. That supposed "fake" IS my evidence. So until you can prove your extraordinary claim, I have done my part.
>>62408225>>62408152, no, it's not. A photo on twatter is not an evidence of 1) attribution of that email address to that person or group 2) attribution of an hypothetical content to that person or group's correspondence. The mail address was not "hateful" per se and the admins didn't snoop on content nor did they receive a court order nor did receive proof by a LEA.>you have to claim that my non-existant proof is fakelook up probatio diabolica. You can prove only something that exists, not something that doesn't exist.
>>62408219>If you're suggesting that _their_ opinion matters and nothing else, that's not an argument to anything.Yes it is. It's an argument to my claim that they are doing nothing wrong by banning people that incite violence. Instead of reacting to that, you go on about maturity and such inconsequential drivel. If you show signs of being butthurt, expect people to call you out on it. Just a friendly tip.
>>62408270>A photo on twatter is not an evidenceYes it is 'an evidence'.>my non-existant proof Again, proof and evidence are two different things. Until you learn that difference it is futile to continue this 'argument'.
>>62408270Prove youre not a nazi, nazi!Protip : you cant, nazi!
>>62408276> It's an argument to my claim that they are doing nothing wrong by banning people that incite violence. It seems to me you missed entirely everything I wrote, since you're so busy dispensing mature advices.>you go on about maturity and such inconsequential drivelthat's you.> If you show signs of being butthurt, expect people to call you out on itThat's you again.>Just a friendly tip.I was trying to have a logical discussion, yet you're falling for this pretentious paternalism AGAIN.As I wrote, it can't be helped.
>>62408270>You can prove only something that exists, not something that doesn't exist.You're saying that a shop exists. Prove it.
>>62408306>Yes it is 'an evidence'.It you repeat it three times in a row it becomes true.>but I didn't mean proof! I meant p-plain e-evidence>yet burden of proof is on you!embarassing.
>>62391447LOL!!!!So, to delete someone's protonmail account,all you need to do is to post their email under some "hate" message.Libtards and other /g/ cucked SJWs will defend this.
>>62408318It seems to me you missed entirely everything I wrote, since you're so busy being upset/butthurt/a victim. One last time: The fact that protonmail is a private company and can do whatever it feels like, is an argument to my claim that they are doing nothing wrong by banning people that incite violence. They are completely within their rights, any of our opinions on the matter are meaningless.
confront them on accounts used by scene people releasing BRRips which actually IS illegal**inb4 they delete them too**
>I am an admin at Privacymail.>I banned someone with the name firstname.lastname@example.org because he is literally hitler.>Oh but it is not because his name is illegal. Actually, we are okay with people calling themselves literallyhitler. We have no problem with that.>But a person called IMJEWISH tweeted a picture, of a paper, that has "gas the jews" written on it along with email@example.com>UNACCEPTABLE TO OUR TOS do we banned him.>I must tweet this out to all my Jewish friends to gain some Jewcredit.This is exactly what happened.Protonmail have just completely destroyed their own reputation. Congratz.
>>62408341>what is the difference between evidence and proof? Until you learn that difference it is futile to continue this 'argument'.
Can someone ask ProtonMail staff what their definition of "hate" is?Is loving your own race "hate" in their eyes now?Are pro-black groups allowed?Are pro-asian groups allowed?Are pro-white groups allowed?ps: you're a moron if you use this honeypot.
>>62408356Just be careful to "hate" the "right" group/ideology/religion if you want it removed, not every hate is equal.
>>62408404So, they had a reputation of supporting the gassing of jews? Well, I'm glad they destroyed that reputation, I feel a lot better about them now.
>>62392595>PM encrypts every email sent>no one but me knows the keyFucking secure.
>>62408415It's not an evidence of anything, retard.
>>62393948Thats true.Video evidence can be found easily.She was a fat slob.
>>62408422>Can someone ask ProtonMail staff what their definition of "hate" is?'Hospitalize people I don't agree with' seems to fall under their definition.
>>62408464F U T I L EUTILE
>>62408400>It seems to me you missed entirely everything I wrote, since you're so busy being upset/butthurt/a victim.It seems to me you're very butthurt since you're parroting my replies in a "no u" fashion.>One last time: The fact that protonmail is a private company and can do whatever it feels like, is an argument to my claim that they are doing nothing wrong by banning people that incite violence. They are completely within their rights, any of our opinions on the matter are meaningless.You see, it's entirely pointless for me to point you yet again at my previous posts since you didn't read them and probably you'll keep doing so.
>>62408492>I have no argument.Fine. Have a nice day.
>>62408404Tfw there are people with Hitler surname (literally) and would be banned by this private mail provider. Because by being born as Hitler is "hatespeech" these days.
>>62408512>Didn't read a single thingDidn't expect anything different.
>>62408532No they wouldn't. Not unless they print out posters asking people to hospitalize others with their email under it.
>>62408558>really, no arguments hereI am aware, again, have a nice day.
>>62408569you see, I'm not even surprised that paternalizing people end up with childish empty shitposting like this. My logical points and arguments are up there and have never been challenged.Don't forget to reply to this post as well with another post displaying yet again your selective blindness, or you'll lose memestreetcreds. The person who posts lasts wins, you know. Content is for pussies.
>>62408652>My logical points and arguments are that if you're suggesting that _their_ opinion matters and nothing else, that's not an argument to anything.>Saying that protonmail is a private company and can do whatever it feels like, and that that is an argument to your claim that they are doing nothing wrong by banning people that incite violence is not challenging that. Have a nice day, for the third time.
>>62408561Or some other person who gets triggered by their name, ideology, religion prints his address on completely legal poster which triggers some groups with special needs. And is this "literally hitler" guy supposed to prove he didnt do it or should he be banned outright anyway according to you?
>>62408814>Or some other hypothetical situation that never happened but I deem likely because of reasonsRight. >And is this "literally hitler" guy supposed to prove he didnt do it Didn't do what? What are you even talking about now?
Template for anyone who wants to ban the email of your enemies
>>62408786>I have to post last with an empty shitpost or I'll lose an internet argument!Like clockwork."doing nothing wrong" != "doing something they're contractually free to do"I've even linked a Tor ticket addressing the same slippery slope, you didn't even open it.Not everything that is legal is commendable and not everything that is commendable is legal. Invoking legality of your own actions is the ultimate last resort in any arguing about opportunity, morality and the like. Invoking wishful thinking to further explain your actions outside of their mere legally acceptable existence is just wrong, and a slippery slope.
>>62408952>"doing nothing wrong" != "doing something they're contractually free to do"That depends entirely on the context friend. In this particular context, the two clearly are the same. If you want to argue morality, choosing to go apeshit over someone literally inciting violence just makes you look silly. Have a nice day, 4.
>>62409033tor ticket, wishful thinking, slippery slope.
>>62409033>literally inciting violencesee >>62408931there was no literal inciting of violence in their address name and they did not snoop on their mails (they claim they aren't able to do, albeit they should be able to do it, technically speaking, at least for any mail directed to or received from non-protonmail addresses)
>>62409113>there was no literal inciting of violence in their address nameAnd they weren't banned for their address name. They were banned for inciting violence. Which they did, the picture of that poster is evidence of that.
>>62408865Are you really that dumb? Literally anyone can put your email address on any poster with any message, legal or not, print it, take a photo of it and claim you are nazi. Email provider that is deleting customers account based on such accusations, to virtue signal to its potential customer base, is just terrible provider. They should not even think about it and they certainly shouldnt be the ones deciding what is legal or not, right or wrong, what is good speech and what is hate speech. They literally shouldnt even waste single dollar they got from subscriptions to judge their customers opinions on anything. Only time they should care about deleting/banning/handing over customers account is when there is legal court order.
>>62409143>for their address namethere's literally nothing hateful in "you will not replace us".>banned for inciting violencethat wasn't proven.
Just use Gmail; Google already knows everything about you.
>>62409169>Literally anyone can put your email address on any poster with any messageYes, and? Are you saying that's what happened? Do you have evidence of that happening? >>62409194>And they weren't banned for their address name>there's literally nothing hateful in "you will not replace us".>they weren't banned for their address name>they weren't >that wasn't provenProtonmail is not a courthouse. They don't have to prove anything. They had convincing evidence and took appropriate measures.
>>62409262they claim they only if there's something hateful about usernames. It's not the case.It's not a courthouse, right. Picture on twitter is not evidence of anything.
>>62409084Your dumb referral to that irrelevant tor ticket is exactly that, irrelevant. Protonmail is not a free and open source community project, it's a private email provider.
>>62409262Evidence is here >>62408931They used that template to ban the poor guy.
>>62409262So we are back at the start, where you were saying their customers are the ones having to prove themselves innocent because of random accusations on twitter... what happened to innocent until proven guilty? Thats certainly some progressive thinking there.
>>62409290>Picture on twitter is not evidence of anything.Yes it is evidence of someone inciting violence. >>62409310Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That jpg does not suffice. For starters there is no link to the poor guy at all, unlike the original photograph which had the guys email address on it.
>>62409368>what happened to innocent until proven guilty?Protonmail is not a courthouse, when will you get this through your thick skull?
>>62409393>Yes it is evidence of someone inciting violence.Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. That jpg does not suffice. >Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.Yes it is evidence of someone framing violence.
>>62392484you don't like my protonmail goyim?
>>62409489Too obvious a honeypot, the virtue signals too alarming
>>62409476>Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.It wasn't an extraordinary claim. That photograph is sufficient. >Yes it is evidence of someone framing violence.No it isn't. It's evidence of that being a possibility, not of that actually happening.
>>62409393it's evidence that someone is allegedly inciting violence, not that X is inciting violence.You know, there's the case of this guy who was called out for being a pedo living in a neighbour small town. It turned out that he wasn't a pedo; rather, an ex-girlfriend wanted to ruin his life with fake statements on facebook. Some justice warrior fell for it and posted literal posters in his city pointing at his alleged sexual preferences.This guy had a pub or something like that. Justice warriors crashed his furniture and painted "I'M A PEDO" on the outside.It has been ruled officially that he's not a pedo. He even went on TV to tell his story. Yet people don't look at him like a non-guilty individual.Be wary of stuff like this.
>>62409595I think >>62391447 is enough evidence for anyone to avoid Protonmail.>It wasn't an extraordinary claimProtonmail going against what it is for is quite extraordinary.
>>62390883too much work for something so simple
>>62409598>it's evidence that someone is allegedly inciting violence, not that X is inciting violence.You're mistaking evidence for proof again. Evidence can point in the wrong direction, I won't deny that. However, if this was my email on that poster, I'm pretty sure a quick message telling protonmail that I have nothing to do with that poster, and that someone is probably trying to frame me, with a few examples of where and how I actually do use my email, would be enough to convince them to unban me.
>>62409417Exactly, they are not court, they dont have know how, they dont have tools, they dont have resources to judge what is right and what is wrong, not even talking about what is legal and what is wrong. Therefore they shouldnt do it and should leave it to mechanisms, that were established by society to do exactly that - LAW SYSTEM and COURTS.Just that they are doing it despite all these things and trying to use it to gain marketing capital proves, they are not serious email provider, that cares about their customer and noone who cares about their data or their privacy should use it. That they are using money gained from subscriptions for "policing" their customers, instead of improving and securing their service should be INSULTING to every single paying customer.tldr Dont use protonmail, not even if you are leftie, liberal, socialist, they dont care abot your privacy, only your money, and when then wind starts blowing from other side, they will dump you as fast as they dump so called "nazis."
>>62409677So, are you saying you would let someone break into your house and idly stand by, because you're not a judge? Or are you being a silly hypocrite?
>>62409636>Protonmail going against what it is for is quite extraordinary.It would be, but no such thing happened. Protonmail is not for inciting violence against people you don't agree with.
>>62409657>Prove you are not Hitler! Show me all your private emails in our privacy email service!No thanks.
>>62409657>You're mistaking evidence for proof againI literally wasn't.
>>62409733You are inciting violence against his person by publicizing their email address by framing violence on him. You better wish he doesn't get into trouble.
>>62408931>>62409310Let's do the test...ANTIFA@protonmail.comBLACKLIVESMATTER@protonmail.comHEWILLNOTDIVIDEUS@protonmail.com...and let's see if they will ban these ones.
Friendly reminder to ALWAYS use your OWN domain (self hosted or not, it doesn't matter), so you won't ever suffer vendor lock-in.
>>62397635If they have quantum computers they can decrypt AES 256 bit in a couple of seconds
>>62410045>AES 256, no.
>>62409875...are these even real?
Clasic, relativization. You are comparing being victim of serious criminal act in happening... with something, that even if actually happened - and as I said email provider doesnt have any way to know because it lacks know-how and tools to find out if it did - IS NOT ILLEGAL. Get it in your head, your made up nonsense that "hatespeech" is is not illegal, because it actually doesnt exist. Anyway, Im not saying protonmail cannot disciminate customers because their political beliefs, Im just saying because they do it, they are terrible provider and shouldnt be used if person actually cares about their data.
>>62409875As I wrote before, make sure you choose right group/ideology/race, otherwise it wont work. Something like "bashing the fash" and "killing the nazis" is civic duty of every progressively liberal bolshevik.
>>62409306>I'll resort calling you names and I'll do my best to miss the point while at it.Like clockwork.
>>62410186I can't tell who is who anymore. I guess that is a good thing.
>>62410184I refuse to believe that tweet is real.
>>62410238A fact is a fact. Prove me wrong.
>>62410234>so much shitposting and empty replies happened that I don't have to reply arguing anything any moreReally relieving.>>62409084>>62408952>>62407713>>62408013these are mine, since you're asking.
>>62410272I checked her feed and her most recent tweet is from 3 days ago. I should note that I have not been involved in any of the ongoing discussions in this thread up until now.
should I, gee?
>>62410371>ywnru.menSomehow this conjures up some really gay mental images
>>62409875Someone should try creating these and see what happens. If protonmail stay quiet, they are just admiting total relativism.More examples: firstname.lastname@example.org vs email@example.com.
>>62410238Some people are finally getting it.
>>62390848Derpymail is pretty good desu
>>62410431Maybe, but you shouldnt use protonmail if you value your personal data anyway.
WELP.Guess I'm still using gmail.Nothing is secure and gmail is the most normal for professtionalism. That's what I got from this thread.
>>62409738>Show me all your private emailsNot what I said>>62409761Yes, you were. >>62409776Saying someone was inciting violence is not inciting violence.
>>62410654No, I weren't.
>>62410654>Not what I saidSo how do you suggest it can be proven, friendly Protonmail employee?
>>62410186>I'll resort calling you names and I'll do my best to miss the point while at it.>you're very butthurt>childish empty shitposting>your selective blindness, or you'll lose memestreetcredsI could go on, but I think this is enougbh to show your hypocrisy. Have a nice day, I think this is the 6th time now.
>>62409657>However, if this was my email on that poster, I'm pretty sureI would appreciate my privacy-oriented e-mail provider won't discuss the case on social media but rather tried to contact me privately first.
>>62410709It can't, that is the point. You people should really stop using the word proof. Seeing as protonmail is easily convinced by a picture on twitter, I'm assuming they would be equally easily convinced by a well thought out email with some evidence to the contrary. (me using the address for "normal" purposes)
>>62410735That is the first fair complaint I've heard in this entire thread. Then again, his email is printed out on a poster for the whole world to see already anyway.
>>62410786>easily convinced by a well thought out email with some evidence to the contrary. (me using the address for "normal" purposes)>not "show me all your private emails"
>>62410811Yes, there is a big difference, I'm assuming you don't understand it?
>>62410786>Prove you are not Hitler by showing your private emails to show it is really private
>>62410830I assume you're an idiot?
>>62410830What is the difference of showing your email and showing your email?
I suspect this thread was created by a putin /pol/lack who got busted by protonmail... Back to your containment board.. Alex breitdrudge
>>62410862>drivelok>>62410874I'm sure it looks that way from your perspective. >>62410892There isn't any difference between those 2. However, I never said anything about showing your email.
>>62410709Easily actually, giving protonmail court ruling based on criminal investigation, that said email address was used for inciting violence. Anything other than that serious provider should ignore and Im not even talking about discussing it on social media.
>>62410723>I'll miss the point AGAIN>I'll call for hypocrisy when every single posts is literal, empty shitposting in a pathetic attempt to have the last word.tor ticket, wishful thinking, slippery slope. logic doesn't self-restrict to free and open-source community projects.>>you're very butthurt>>childish empty shitposting>>your selective blindness, or you'll lose memestreetcredsway to go to distort the quote history. The first quote, "you're very butthurt" is >>62408492>It seems to me you're very butthurt since you're parroting my replieshappened after>>62408400>you're so busy being upset/butthurt/a victim.The "childish empty shitposting" is, well, what you're doing.The "memestreetcreds" and "selective blindness" quote appeared here >>62408652 to call you out on you empty shitposting. Yet somehow I'm "hypocrite". Wonderful.
>>62410896wtf is that?
>>62410896Proof that Russians did it.>>62408082
>>62410930>There isn't any difference between those 2. However, I never said anything about showing your email>>62410786>I'm assuming they would be equally easily convinced by a well thought out email with some evidence to the contrary. (me using the address for "normal" purposes)Yes, you're an idiot. And no, it's not a perspective.
>>62410939Actually, it started here, where you got triggered over me using the phrase 'stop crying'. >>62408142This sent you into a tirade about being mature, and me not being it. You still haven't recovered from it I see. I wished you a nice day a lot of times now, but you're selectively blind to that and focus on 'meanie words' instead, like a toddler would. Also, you keep crying about me missing some supposed "point" you're making even though I have already addressed it. Your little tor ticket is meaningless in this conversation. That ticket is a discussion between people working on a free and open source project. Protonmail is a private company. You are simply trying to make me defend a point I never made, namely a point of morality. Reply to this again so you can "win" the non existent argument, like the big boy you are.
>>62411049>a well thought out email with some attachments = showing all my private emailsok brainlet
>>62411049I think he is just role playing
>TFW /g/ gets sidetracked into talking about very small details in order to prove who has the bigger intelligence epeen.I love a good autistic debate poking at small details in the opposing side's argument as well /g/, but there is a point where it's not proving anything for anyone except yourself in your mind. It's not practical at that point.So, as for the OP's question, there really isn't any better alternatives, right?
>>62411102My brainlet cannot comprehend how some attachments is not going to be private emails
>>62411144>My brainlet cannot comprehendAt least you're being honest now.
>>62411128>It's not practical at that point.This thread is great, we are debunking the Protonmeme, go clean your room if you want practical.
>>62411166I think nobody can understand the logic of showing private emails that are not private
>>62411192>My brainlet cannot comprehend therefor I think nobody canHm, yes, this happens a lot.
>>62411083>triggered over me using the phrase 'stop crying'.Yep. Talking about hypocrisy and rhetorical fallacies.>Also, you keep crying about me missing some supposed "point" you're making even though I have already addressed it.No, you didn't. No, I'm not cyring.>Your little tor ticket is meaningless in this conversation. That ticket is a discussion between people working on a free and open source project. Protonmail is a private company. You are simply trying to make me defend a point I never made, namely a point of morality. No one challenged the fact that it's legally possible for them to ban an account. No one challenged the fact that they can provide or not services to whoever for whatsoever reason. What has been challenged if such a pre-emptive behaviour is commendable and logic from a service provider point of view, regardless of brand considerations of whatnot. It seems you fail hard to grasp the difference, probably because of your selective blindness.>Reply to this again so you can "win" the non existent argument, like the big boy you are.This is what you're consistently doing without adding anything to some simple logical observations.>toddler>crying>recoverliterally >>>/b/
>>62411205Protonmail is going to look at your private emails to unban you because they heard some rumor about you being Hitler.So Protonmail is a pointless honeypot then?
>>62411221>What has been challenged if such a pre-emptive behaviour is commendable and logic from a service provider point of view, regardless of brand considerations of whatnot.Again, you're trying, desperately now, to make me defend a point I never made. Have a nice day, lost count, but last time.
>>62411119I hope for him Protonmail will give him some shekels for defending the undefendable "for free" on the chans
>>62411249>My brainlet cannot comprehend
>>62411291He is doing a good job actually nonetheless
>>62410238Protip: only 1 out of 10 twitter screencaps posted in 4chan are actually real
>>62390883Doesnt this expose your IP, anyone who you give your email address to, you are also giving your home IP to.
>>62411306So Protonmail really is pointless then because all their big talks of privacy are exactly honeypot lies
>>62391305>>62391152If I wanted a specific email to be secure I wouldnt access it from a smart phone... just saying.
>>62411379Sigh... You made such an improvement by saying your brainlet can't comprehend. You really should've just left it at that.
>>62391498But how do they determine who is banned? Cant anyone just say "lol im a nazi email me at firstname.lastname@example.org" (when that is not their email) then report it to protonmail and get that email banned?
>>62411282>Again, you're trying, desperately now, to make me defend a point I never made.Absolutely not. I expressed ,y point clearly and concisely countless times, yet you felt the need to paternalize, call me names and shitpost for countless hours. You explicitly adversed the point with no argument here >>62409033>>"doing nothing wrong" != "doing something they're contractually free to do">That depends entirely on the context friend. In this particular context, the two clearly are the same.and here >>62408111>>If you're suggesting that _their_ opinion matters and nothing else, that's not an argument to anything.>Yes it is. It's an argument to my claim that they are doing nothing wrong by banning people that incite violence.then you went on countless times with arguments like "butthurt", "victim" and similar stuff ("toddler" is just the icing on the cake)
>>62395237Unless its a protonmail to protonmail email
>>62403625Whats ur protonmail so I can false flag u as a nazi then bud (dont actually tell me)Its retarded to ban people over this because protonmail cant verify its actually you making the post unless they read your emails...
>>62411429"special snowflake" ecosystem are imho just adding confusion in the security circus, if they end up being interoperable with traditional not-so-encrypted providers.
>>62411396If they feel someone is hate speech and illegal activities, they can ban it. They will accept anything as proof including the template above.
>>62411396If enough leftists reports you on twitter for being "nazi, bigot, white supremacist", your account will be banned. No real evidence is needed.
>>62411462I agree; I was just pointing that out is all. Really, the email standard is cancer, something entirely new is needed. Really its only still used because business/universities run email, period. Its the "lingua franca". I think ultimately using something more like signal will be the future, I forget what they use by name though.
>>62411462Protonmail is probably a CIA pet project trying to create an ecosphere for the next Hillary.However, as always, they hire dumb SJWs to run the shitshow.
>>62411499>>62411483Sooo it seems the only "solution", and I am not suggesting anyone do this, is to pump reports with so much false noise that they cease banning anyone at all.
I noticed protonmail says they want u to pay for multiple email accts, but what stops u from making multiple free accts?
>>62411527Not really, they might just start banning everyone (since they are retarded)
>>62411548i have 2 free accounts. i think the one you pay for is so you can link them together.
>>62411566Do they also log IPs and check that "this IP also logs into these other protonmail accts" then ban them all?
>>62411548>what stops u from making multiple free acctsCaptchas
>>62411410>you're trying, to make me defend a point I never made.>Absolutely not. I expressed my point clearly and concisely countless timeskek, as if that negates anything. You indeed clearly and concisely expressed your desire for me to defend something I never said or implied. I repeatedly told you I wasn't going to do that. You're STILL trying. Also, those 2 quotes that in your mind are contradictory, actually explain my point very well. Namely, that they are doing nothing wrong and that 'nothing wrong' in this context means 'contractually free to do'. >more crying about meanie wordsyawnI'm not sure if you're misunderstanding things on purpose or if you're really this dense. Either way, you're starting to get really boring. If your next post is AGAIN trying to make me defend something I never said, I'll be the bigger man and ignore you like I should have done many posts ago.
>>62411583I see. Likely the real reason they wont use imap.
>>62411499>real evidence>evidence I don't like is fake evidence now#MAGA
Does anyone else do these bans? Lol imagine if gmail did this how many would get false flagged and banned.
>>62411527Or you know, just dont use protonmail and if anyone asks about it, tell them they delete their customers accounts without any real evidence of wrongdoing and are possibly discriminating customers based on their political beliefs.
>>62411651Other providers seem so suck though.
>>62411646None of the big email at least. However they all have privacy problems
>>62411527Yes, or, don't be a retard and put your email address on a poster that advises people to hospitalize people with an opinion different than yours.
>>62411646Gmail just syncs all your emails with NSA/CIA. No need to ban anyone.
>>62411719You can't stop anyone from framing you tho using >>62408931
>>62411600>Also, those 2 quotes that in your mind are contradictory, actually explain my point very well. Namely, that they are doing nothing wrong and that 'nothing wrong' in this context means 'contractually free to do'.and we fall back to >>62408013>If you're suggesting that protonmail, or any other private company, should not care about anyone opinion, that's exactly what I wrote.>If you're suggesting that _mine_ is an opinion and _your_ wishful thinking + slippery slope isn't an opinion, you're wrong and there's no point arguing if we aren't having a logic discussion.>If you're suggesting that _their_ opinion matters and nothing else, that's not an argument to anything. Obviously a private company is not legally obliged to give out any service to any one (with some corner case exceptions).also, >>62396663>No private company has a legal obligation to provide anything to anyone. Not an argument to anything.all of this stemming from >>62407537>They don't need a reason, it's their site. They have a good reason this time though, inciting violence probably is, or at least should be, illegal.No one challenged it's their site. No one challenged they legally need any reason to give or not a service. The slippery slope wishful thinking kicked in with "They have a good reason". And "should be illegal". And we fall back to >>62407713>Wishful thinking, and slippery slope. https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/ticket/23270>>62408952>"doing nothing wrong" != "doing something they're contractually free to do">cryingNever cried about anything. Just exposed your faulty rhetoric. I believe I've always acted cool-headed without calling you names, just exposing your fallacies. Well, "empty shitposting" is the most gruel wording I've used yet I never used it as an argument.
>>62411600>>62411799can both of you please fuck off
>>62411767Pff, if that happens you can just show your privacy protecting mail provider all your private emails to prove them, you are not a nazi.
>>62411837At least they are asking nicely, Google just go look at it themselves
>>62411874>At least they are asking nicely,I've seen ransomware asking nicely too
>>62411767>You can't stop anyone from framing you thoI can't stop anyone from trying. One email with a picture of my business card that carries the email on it attached should convince protonmail though.
>>62411874Big difference is that goolag never advertised itself as protecting your privacy. Also are they actually deleting accounts of its customers because of "hatespeech"?
>>62411928Too bad, they banned you already and they are not going to unban you, you can't make them
>>62411928>One email with a picture of my business card that carries the email on it attached should convince protonmail though.It doesn't make sense, I can stamp business cards with fake credentials for $2 in 5 minutes.
>>62411928How convenient to have to prove your paid email provider that you are not a nazi every time when random person with special needs accuses you of being nazi.
>>62411982I can also print out a poster with any address on it in 5 minutes, for even less money. That convinced them, why shouldn't my business cards convince them?
>>62412010I'm sure if it happened more than once they would recognize a pattern and stop bothering me with it. Convenient it is not, but I still rather do that than have google upload all my communications directly to NSA.
>>62411982>Hewill Notdivideus Phd>Nothit Ler Wifi Consultants Ltd>email@example.com
Er... someone make a new thread so we can continue the banter?
>>62411799>The slippery slope wishful thinking kicked in with "They have a good reason". And "should be illegal".>What is a personal opinion?Also, not sure what country you're from, but in my country inciting violence is indeed illegal.
>>62412042Id rather avoid both, but at least gmail is not calling itself privacy minded email provider. Unlike protonmail that was literally discussing email address of their customer and its fate on social media.
>>62412117In my country, defamation is a crime
>>62412117And it is up to court to decide what is inciting violence, not protonmail, not feels of twitter users, not google, not facebook, not talking heads in media.
>>62412170>gmail is not calling itself privacy mindedlol, yes, that would be something. >protonmail that was literally discussing email address of their customer and its fate on social mediaWell, they were discussing a violence inciting poster, posted in public, for the whole world to see, with one of their addresses on it. It's not like they started talking about a random customers email.
>>62412226In court, yes. But protonmail can and does do whatever they please with their service.
>>62391447>SJWOh, goodie. You're one of "those." Can't you people stay on /v/?
>>62412271So their privacy is complete bullshit and honeypot then, confirmed/thread
>>62412271... they can do whatever they want != it's a commendable way to act for a privacy-oriented mountain jew paid service provider
>>62412288>can't you people be replaced?you will not replace us
>>62412312No, they haven't looked at the guys emails, supposedly they can't. They saw someone post a picture of a poster. They decided this was the kind of filth they could do without. No ones privacy was invaded. The poster and the picture of it were both posted in public, for anyone to see.
>>62412330That is your opinion. Nobody cares about your opinion, least of all protonmail.
>>62412271>do whatever they pleaseActually they cannot, negligence can be sued if damage is caused, defamation can also be sued, especially when the admin tweeted about it.
>>62412365Ok, protonmail employee.
>>62412381Yes, they absolutely can do whatever they want. And people can try to sue them for whatever reason they want. Funny how that works. Also, posting on twitter is not their own service, they have to abide by twitters rules when they do that.
>>62412365>your opinionthe fact that it's a slippery slope is not an opinion.>nobody caressorry to burst your bubble, but a lot of people care about how their privacy-oriented paid provider deal with abuse reports.
>>62412436>Yes, they absolutely can do whatever they want.wew
>>62412348No, I said stay on /v/. Can you read?Ethics in games journalism aren't going to fix themselves, bro. The world needs you.
>>62412244And they should have kept quiet about it and solved it with their customer, not on social media with some clearly biased "activists." And by solved I mean waited for court ruling that email was used for inciting violence and it indeed need to be shut down. Obviously no such thing happened, because the poster for the whole world to see - even law enforcement of course - real or fake, was completely legal.But hey, have fun explaining you are not a nazi to some crazed activist and private mail provider pandering to sjw demographic. Privately ofc, like last time, on twitter. And so there are no doubts you are not a nazi, better post all your private mails on twitter, so they can check them all for thought crimes.Or just ask the guy who wants to dox your mail, because he doesnt agree with your political beliefs, to do it privately, so you dont have to do all that proving of your innocence through social media.
>>62412496>a lot of people care about how their privacy-oriented paid provider deal with abuse reportsIndeed, so do I. Your opinion however is still meaningless to me, even if you happen to agree.
>>62412271Uh, and thats the point of all the people here saying it is shit provider that doesnt care about their customers and their privacy.
>>62412589>opinionexcept that logic is not an opinion.
>>62412601You don't seem to understand the difference between privacy and the public domain. Talking about an email address that has been posted in the public domain doesn't violate anyones privacy, at all.
>>62412624I agree. Which is why I never said anything about logic, just about your opinion.
>>62412668Slippery slope is logic. Not an opinion.
>>62396908>Why exactly do you fa/g/lings want encrypted email?That's sort of the point, shitdick. It's none of your business.
>>62412673Which is why I never said anything about slippery slope, just about your opinion.
>>62412645Talking about an email address of one of your paying customers is not commendable, at all. Whether it's legal for them to discuss it doesn't make it any more commendable.
>>62412696Your opinion is irrelevant.
>>62412686I never expressed opinions. I only exposed slippery slopes.
>>62412496>a lot of people care about how their privacy-oriented paid provider deal with abuse reportswhy by discussing them on twitter with "activists" ofc, I also bet alot of their customers care that their privacy minded email provider uses their subscription money for thought policing and substituting the role of criminal investigators and courts instead of improving their actual service
>>62412714Then feel free to ignore what I said about your opinion.
>>62396960>haha what do I need privacy forLet's have your (mom's) credit card and social security number, then.
>>62412738I never expressed opinions. I only exposed slippery slopes.
>>62412767>Then feel free to ignore what I said about your opinion.
>>62412710not an argument to anything.
>>62412781Just like your opinion.
>>62412775I never expressed opinions. I only exposed slippery slopes. Yet somehow you're consistently referencing opinions I've not expressed. It's like talking with a wall.
>>62412799>Then feel free to ignore what I said about your opinion.kek, what's so difficult for you?
>>62412792Do you find commendable for a service-oriented, paid email service provider to deal with abuse reports on twitter? A simple yes or no will suffice.
>>62412589kek, then it should be alright if however many irrelevances are convinced that protonmail service is unreliable and unfit for use.
>>62412815It's not a simple yes or no question. It depends entirely on the circumstances.
>>62412825>then it should be alrightehh, sure?
>>62412827No, it really doesn't.
>>62412645You are crazy. That email address could be posted in public by anyone owner of the address was communicating with and even if the owner posted it by himself, discussing it on twitter with some crazed activist they just made the owner of the address target of attack. All without any investigation, all without any proof, just because email address was on some LEGAL poster that expressed non mainstream political opinion. Thats what "privacy minded" email provider does for you.
>>62412852>I'm a simple man with a simple world viewHm, that you are.
>>62412855>Hospitalize people you don't agree with is a non mainstream political opinionkekAlso, talking about someones email address does not invade that persons privacy. Just like talking about your name doesn't invade your privacy. No personal details were ever revealed. You clearly don't understand what privacy is.
>>62412845Then I'll continue being helpful and informative to other anons and aquaintances and inform them of how fickle protonmail is as a company and advice them to take their business elsewhere. You know, like this thread is nicely doing.
>>62412827>It's not a simple yes or no question. It depends entirely on the circumstances.Translation : if reported person is someone I dont agree with ("nazi"), privacy oriented email provider should make his address and all his private emails and contacts public. Also it is our public duty to bash the fash.
>>62412866You're clearly too sophisticated and mature for me. It's clearly acceptable for a privacy-oriented e-mail provider to discuss the fate their paying customer's accounts on twitter without being compelled to do so by a Court order or anything; but only if the "circumstances" (or the generally accepted political agenda) says so.Please accept the apologies of a humble brainlet.
>>62412907kek, you do that, warrior!
>>62412926Pretty bad translation matey, keep working on your english. Also no emails or contacts were made public.
>>62412951>no emails or contacts were made public.not an argument, and no one ever suggested protonmail was in the position to read their mail.
>>62412930>shopping somewhere that treats you with respect makes you a warrior
>>62412928>It's clearly acceptableI just told you it's not that simple. >>62412964>not an argument, and no one ever suggested protonmail was in the position to read their mail.>>62412928>privacy oriented email provider should make his address and all his private emails and contacts public>>62412983No, but continueing being helpful and informative to other anons and acquaintances and inform them of how fickle protonmail is as a company and advice them to take their business elsewhere is.
>>62413003>I just told you it's not that simple."It's complicated" is a bullshit excuse to dodge a pretty simple question.
>>62413025kek, I have no answer for this level of ignorance.
>>62413003>wanting to spare other people from the experience of a shit service makes you a warrior.Do you hate your aquaintances or something, anon
>>62413048Why do you think being a warrior is a bad thing? Aren't you proud to be fighting the evils of libcuckery?
>>62412894>Hospitalize people you don't agree with is a non mainstream political opinion>Bash the people you dont agree with is mainstream political opinionOne of these groups which apparently "seeks peace through violence" has been designated as domestic terror group by dhs.
>>62413036I really wish I could be enlightened.like you, I'm so ignorant. Yet I know what I'd expect from the a privacy-oriented, paid, e-mail provider, while it seems you don't.
>>62413071I don't think it's a bad thing. Avoiding a company with no commitment to free speech does not make me a warrior, it's a very easy and convenient thing to do.
ITT: protonmail representative getting MAD now that they're being called out
>>62413087Oh but I do, I'd expect them to respect my privacy, which they have done btw. >>62413099Oh, ok? You're not a warrior then... Happy now?
>>62413081>Hospitalizing people is the same as verbally bashing peoplekek
>>62413124>Oh but I doIt seems you don't. You can't answer a simple question with a "yes" or a "no". >they have donethe only thing they seem to have done is: not being able to decrypt email, since they're technically unable to do so.
>>62413193>You can't answer a simple question with a "yes" or a "no".Yes I can. The question you asked however is not a simple one. >the only thing they seem to have done is: not being able to decrypt emailkek, so, the most important thing then? The thing that guarantees privacy? Gotcha.
>>62413124>Oh, ok? You're not a warrior then... Happy now?Yes. I should also thank OP, for bringing this to my attention, I wouldn't have known about this issue without them. I'll try to reciprocate in kind in the future too. Hopefully this makes it more clear why I'm happy, I learned something useful today.
>>62413260kek alright matey, keep fighting the good fight! Or don't you like that phrasing either?
>>62413219"Is it commendable for a privacy-oriented email provider to comment their paying customer's accounts on twitter?" is a very simple question, with a clear and simple answer. Nothing complicated about it.>kekSo you're basically saying that I have to mistrust my own email service provider, even if I'm paying them for privacy and so on. What prevents them from backdooring their proprietary desktop client implementation or injecting malicious js code in the webmail just to fulfil "greater good"? Hushmail happened already. Except they acted on Court order and they bother about virtue signalling (twitter and SJW is a modern cancer)
>>62413286That's fine, why do you keep seeking my approval anyway? I'm not your dad. Anyway, good luck to you too, hope you manage to avoid unnecessary frustation too.
>>62413353>they bother*they didn't bother
>>62413353>Nothing complicated about it.That's what a simple man with a simple world view would think. >So you're basically sayingNo, no I'm not. It's bad enough that you don't fully understand the questions you're asking, let's try not to put words in my mouth, shall we?
>>62413371>why do you keep seeking my approval anyway?I'm just trying to not upset you is all. Sorry for taking your feelings into consideration, geez. You're the one who started whining about it.
>>62413155>verballySomehow missed that word from their posters. Also cnn did when they published article about antifa seeking peace through violence. Well misunderstandings happen, it was same with ywnru case. Considering mental condition of antifa members it is clear, that by hospitalizing them they actually meant providing them best possible care at the psych ward.
>>62413423>It's too complicatedthat's brainlet answer to everything. Either you expose how it's complicated and how to distinguish peculiar cases, or you just shut up.
>>62413353>Is it commendable for a privacy-oriented email provider to comment their paying customer's accounts on twitter?What does commendable mean exactly in this context? What kind of comments? What lead to those comments? Who is the customer? What are the suspicions? What evidence is there? What other actions were taken? What was the reaction to those actions? >simple questionlol
>>62413423>No, no I'm not.Yes, yes you are. The only thing that prevents your privacy-oriented paid e-mail service provider from snooping on you is what is technically impossible. As long as it is technically impossible, obviously.
>>62413502>What does commendable mean exactly in this context? What kind of comments? What lead to those comments? Who is the customer? What are the suspicions? What evidence is there? What other actions were taken? What was the reaction to those actions?Regardless of comments, customers, suspicion, evidence and actions taken, is it commendable for a privacy oriented paid email provider to discuss their customer's account fate on twitter?It's a plain, crystalline, simple question.
>>62413468If they really meant physically bashing, they are as wrong as the poster. It's just that bashing is more often used to describe verbal "abuse". >>62413470>>62413502there you go simpleton>>62413509>The only thing that prevents them from snooping on you is what is technically impossibleI don't think it's the only thing, but it is clearly the most important thing.
>>62413561>Regardless of details that are actually important and might change your answer to the question, just answer the question!kek
>>62413561Yeah you're a retard mate.
>>62413579>simpletonthere you go, genius. >>62413561>>62413613>details are important and might change the answerNo, they're not. Either you deal with abuse reports with a defined procedure or you don't. A paying customer of a privacy-oriented email service would reasonable expect at least some professional handling of abuse reports.
>>62413641You're too much of a genius to answer a question, I get that.
>>62413671S I M P L EIMPLE
>>62413688Yeah that must be it.
>>62390848>banning accounts for violating their "rules"Host your own or use something other than mail (like tox).>isn't encrypting emailsEncrypt mails end-to-end with OpenPGP.You should have done that from the start anyway.
>>62413697If giving out a professional service means being simple, then I prefer a simple mail provider.>>62413711My apologies for having asked you to answer a simple question.
>>62413579>if they really meantWhat they really mean is obvious from the riots all over the world, where they violently attack other protesters and even police... since like, you know, 1930s.>>62413671Isnt it clear by now that he believes that actual procedure how to deal with reports should be based on political beliefs/ideology/religion/etc. of customer? How dont these people understand such double standards will turn against them?
>>62414140>What they really mean is obviousI don't think it is. >he believes that actual procedure how to deal with reports should be based on political beliefs/ideology/religion/etc. of customer? lolwat? No I think it should be based on the circumstances. You know, like how a judge looks at all the circumstances in a trial, instead of simply applying the exact letter of the law everywhere? I know, a simple black and white world would be so much easier, right?
>>62414262>You know, like how a judge looks at all the circumstances in a trialYou're mixing up circumstances evaluated in a trial with the actual trial. It's like saying that the procedure a trial has to follow changes according to external circumstances. No, it's not how it works.Moreover, this is not a trial, and you're still grasping for straws.
>>62414351>You're mixing up circumstances evaluated in a trial with the actual trial.No I'm not, you're trying to create a difference where there isn't one. >this is not a trialIndeed it isn't. This is a private company deciding how to deal with evidence of inciting violence.
>>62414422>No I'm not, you're trying to create a difference where there isn't one.Yes you are, and the fact you negate there is a difference between what's being evaluated in a trial and the procedure dictating a trial indicates only how much you're in bad faith.>This is a private company deciding how to deal with evidence of inciting violence.No, this is a private company virtue signalling on twitter. Entirely different game.
>>62414466>the fact you negate there is a difference between what's being evaluated in a trial and the procedure dictating a trialI'm not, you're again trying to put words in my mouth. >virtue signallingkek, damn those libcucks to heck, amirite?
>>62414519>I'm not, you're again trying to put words in my mouth.Fascinating how "kek" and "not so simple" and "putting words in my mouth" are the only stuff you seem able to write.These are your words: >>62414262>I think it should be based on the circumstances. You know, like how a judge looks at all the circumstances in a trial, instead of simply applying the exact letter of the law everywherenot something I wrote. It's clear your mixing the procedure with what's evaluated in the procedure.
>>62414262>I dont think its clear what they meanAntifa thugs literally violently attack protesters and cops, destroy public and private property, boast on social media they are coming for scalps, they are designated as domestic terror group and even msm is throwing them under the bus after latest violence.>circumstancesExactly what I said, double standards. Was customer labelled by an "activist" as "nazi"? Overwhelming evidence, ban him. Does he resist drumpf? He gets a free pass. What a great idea to make private company that provides email judge and jury in thought crime cases. What could go wrong, they will certainly make great privacy minded mail provider, their twitter hearings will be absolute pinnacle of privacy.
>>62414582>It's clear your mixing the procedure with what's evaluatedI'm not, though I admit the wording was a bit messy. It happens when you respond to people putting words in your mouth. Endlessly correcting them gets a bit tiring. >What a great idea to make private company that provides email judge and jury in thought crime casesYeah, better ban private email providers completely and let all email go through the governent, lol, moron.
>>62414650>It happens when you respond to people putting words in your mouth.That's something new. Somehow I put word in your mouth even before you replied. Even more fascinating.>It's notIt is. And you didn't explain what the "correct wording" or "authentic interpretation" of your genial thought is. I, for sure, will refrain from putting words in your mouth, since you're so good in shooting yourself in the foot.>better ban private email providers completely and let all email go through the governent,What an idiotic fallacy. whataboutism at its finest
>>62414733>Somehow I put word in your mouth even before you replied.>he believes that >It's notThere are more examples, but I think this proves my point. >whataboutismThat doesn't mean what you think it means.
>>62414799>There are more examples, but I think this proves my point.You didn't post any example. Your post was barely intelligible. Btw I'm not >>62414140 , I'm >>62413671>That doesn't mean what you think it meansIt's always so fascinating to see how you dodge to express any concept with even more whataboutery. He didn't suggest to ban private email providers and your absurd theorem is simply idiotic.
>>62414913>You didn't post any exampleYes, I posted 2. Whether it's you or not is irrelevant. They are 2 examples of me replying to people putting words in my mouth. And admittedly being too lazy to correct them. >whatabouteryYeah, still using that term incorrectly I'm afraid.