The video is probably factually correct, but very disingenuous with its interpretations and conclusions imo.
Of course Mozilla and Firefox have their own share of problems and bad decisions, and they are pretty well known and talked about from what I've seen, but equating it to Google and Chrome is just pure cynicism. Mozilla having to earn money somehow (1% donations!) and Google trying to maximize profits at all costs is not the same thing, even if it might look similar sometimes.
Streaming services did it the other way around. We had one platform for almost everything, and then the studios created their own to get more of the subscription money.
If you wanna torrent make sure it supports port forwarding.
I think the ban was a little too harsh, but removing that comment was the right decision.
I also see a few problems with your "your highness" comparison:
"Your highness" is an official title, not a personal designation. Its proper usage depends heavily on the context, e.g. the perceived social rank and status, how well people know each other, if it's a formal or informal conversation, and so on. Pronouns have none of that, you just use the one people identify as and that's it.
It implies that people just pick whatever term they can come up with to mess with others or to mock them. People don't choose a pronoun lightly, they usually think about it a lot and it's an important personal decision. They also usually pick one of the common pronouns, so it's really not hard to just use it.
Making quick logical comparisons regarding social norms is a very tricky thing in my experience. There are many things going on that we aren't fully aware of all of the time, and getting it wrong can hurt people badly.
Downvote it to oblivion then, but disagreeing or not being interested is no reason to remove a post.
Edit: Saw the post. I think the removal was valid, but the ban was a little harsh. And not being interested had nothing to do with it.
Yes and yes. It runs the bridge and en/decrypts messages locally on your device, so full e2ee is preserved. The bridge still has to login to your messenger accounts, so nothing changes there.
There's almost no difference to a good Matrix client if you already selfhost the server and bridges. Most of the Beeper client's value is making it very easy to manage the bridges they host for you.
Nope, not if you use the Beeper Bridge Manager. I'm running two bridges right now, without having my own Matrix server.
I started using their Signal and WhatsApp bridges today, probably one of the easiest setups I ever did. You just run a Docker container for every bridge, and login to your Signal/WhatsApp account by chatting in the app with the Matrix bot it creates.
Literally takes like 5 minutes if you've used Docker before, and you don't need a domain or forwarded ports or anything.
You only need to selfhost the bridge, it can use their Matrix server. Makes it much simpler.
Self hosting their bridges is really simple, if you have a device to run the Docker containers on. That way you don't have to give them your logins, all they get to see are encrypted Matrix messages.
If you don't want to pay for an account anywhere (VPN/Usenet/Debrid/...), then you might want to try out Torrent + I2P. I haven't used it myself, but from what I know it's a slower but completely provider-less alternative to VPNs for anonymization, and Torrents are free ofc.
That being said, you'll have a much easier time if you pay for a seedbox for example. It's just a small server in a datacenter somewhere, that happens to be better connected and more private than your typical home internet connection, and that you can use however you like.