this post was submitted on 20 May 2026
1243 points (99.1% liked)

Technology

84866 readers
5178 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
1243
'There is no universe in which Proton VPN compromises its no-logs policy' — Proton joins the backlash against Canada's surveillance bill (www.techradar.com)
submitted 3 days ago by LuminousLuddite@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
254 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

• Proton VPN has hit back at Canada's proposed Bill C-22

• The proposed legislation could require VPNs to log user metadata

• NordVPN and Windscribe have also slammed the bill

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] toebert@piefed.social 1 points 1 day ago

I see your point and also agree with you, but at the same time it seems like you're implying it's a binary choice. Either we support labour or we support the right. The way I see it, they're a centrist party now at best. I want to support a more leftist/libertarian party. I don't have to run to vote for reform just because labour didn't do as well as I hoped, but I also don't need to vote for labour if they do things I hate (which the war on privacy is).

And of course the online safety act passed with a majority. They're using the easiest manipulation tactic to describe all of these type of bills that exists. "It's for the children". It takes a lot to oppose it while making sure you don't give ammunition to be smeared with "oh they hate kids/don't care about children's wellbeing" while defending it is as simple as repeating it's to protect kids. Doesn't even matter what the bill does as long as it can loosely be related it's a guaranteed "moral high ground".

Lastly, I don't think it's good to excuse bad policies by saying they also did other good things.