As to Europe, yes. What’s inconsistent about the idea that the multi-national infrastructure put into place to reduce the chance of war was also anti-democratic?
The person you're replying to doesn't abide by their own stated principles. It's a mistake to think that they're merely reminding you of the rules. No, it's an order.
Just look at how many political comments they made. Especially the downvoted and/or flagged ones. They are horrendous. So many words spent justifying ICE murders and lying about how the victims were violent terrorists. They spend all day thinking about how best to downplay the egregious actions of the current regime, at one point writing how ICE agent's masks are just merely "face/neck warmers."
This isn't a person who should be taken seriously.
They also recently complained about their own experience being downvoted and flagged for ostensibly political reasons, which also cuts against the guidelines. It’s selective adherence at best.
Periodic reminder that there are people seeking to derail discussions critical of AI and divert attention away from the actual substance of these issues.
Defense in depth only works if you put up meaningful security measures. As numerous people including GP has pointed out, you still retain the means to log user traffic. That's not meaningfully secure than the alternatives.
More importantly, trusting random strangers is much better than trusting a known hostile actor. During the Freenode fiasco, you have repeatedly demonstrated yourself to be untrustworthy and vengeful. Everyone saw your petty revenges against people who dared voice the slightest of criticisms. Why on earth should anyone trust that you'll uphold your customer's privacy no matter what?
I think you should look into the narrative before parroting falsehoods. Further, I’m not sure what came off as a “revenge” in my response unless facts are being interpreted as such.
The whole community fled from Freenode as a direct consequence of your actions. You aren't convincing anyone with your "debunkings," dear masterdebater.
I find websites punishing users over their choice of browsers to be questionable. But if they're going down that route, why on earth allow Chrome, a mass surveillance product made by the richest ad company in the world? The level of harm being done is so much bigger with Chrome, both in terms of scale and the effect it has on society. It's not even comparable.
I wish the authors won't be demotivated by this if they ever see this top comment. Borg is such an invaluable project done by volunteers. They don't deserve the blatant abuse demonstrated by the OP. Even more so when the reasons are either the OP ignoring a well written documentation or some unreasonable demand to degrade the security of the software by prominently showing how to disable encryption for a remote backup system. The notion that having the setup command generate encryption keys is so "elitist" that it warrants abusive insults is ... beyond me.
I believe some of the Chromium folks are partly responsible for this. Though it's probably not a planned "campaign" of any sort, I've seen some prominent figures constantly direct hatred toward other browser vendors online, and countless webdevs piling on. I'm not posting links because many of them are highly toxic, but browser developers on the receiving end has expressed their frustrations more than once.
