shadycomposer

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

It’s a privilege lol

[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I don’t feel I understand it when the two words social and privacy are put together.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

Does this law apply to Apple and Google?

[–] [email protected] -2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I don’t believe governments are capable of hosting anything securely though.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 months ago

And they still want your phone number.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 months ago (8 children)

Back to Facebook messenger?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

When you chose to use their free service, you already sold your soul to devil.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

let’s say you use weeds and weeds is legal where you are, but it’s illegal to drive after using weeds.

Now you’re arrested for DUI. Next day you make to the headline: “Man arrested for using weeds”. Is it the fact? Yes. Do you think it’s all the necessary facts?

Your opinion is based on the assumption that everyone should be allowed to use VPN to do anything. I may agree with you, but it doesn’t change how bad the article is.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I’m not sure if I understand your point.

If you say their law sucks, their LE agency sucks, they freely interpret their laws in prosecution, etc. , I completely agree with you. But if you’re trying to say using vpn to browse internet in China can risk a big fine, which is what the title of the article is saying, I don’t think it’s accurate. News agency should state the facts, not their ill formed opinions.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 11 months ago (8 children)

“Man’s income of 1m was confiscated due to using VPN for work’ would be accurate.

‘Man is fined 1m for using VPN’ is not.

There’s no evidence (yet) that someone will be fined this much by simply using vpn in China to browse otherwise banned sites.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 11 months ago (10 children)

Intentionally misleading by summarizing partial facts is simply evil. Not sure if anyone may be satisfied with this approach, but even if some do, I’m willing to bet they will become unsatisfied if missing part of the facts is actually what they care about.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago (26 children)

The 1m was confiscated because it was ‘illegal income’, not because he used VPN. Yes, it’s still shitty that using VPN to access GitHub makes his income illegal, and yes Chinese government just sucks. But it’s amused that those news agencies intentionally use misleading titles. They are no better than the Chinese government.

view more: next ›