To be honest, I think VPN businesses and specifically politically charged ones like Mullvad is doing disservice for the security of the country and specifically EU in this case.

I think the right course of action should be a political activism, not a technological one. Especially when the company doing it makes a fortune.

The course, when one can just disengage from participating in society by sidestepping the problems by either using VPNs in terms of censorship or by using Crypto in case of regulations is very dangerous and will reinforce the worst trends.

Finally such person will still have to rely on the community around for physical protection to live.

So instead of speaking from the high ground, please, tell us what your solution about mass disinformation happening from US social media megacorps, Russia mass disinformation, mass recruitment of people for sabotage on critical infrastructure.

Tell us, how can we keep living in free society when this freedom is being used as a leverage by forces trying to destroy your union.

I just want to remind you that dismantling EU is strategic goal of the US, Russia and China.

Please, give us your political solutions to the modern problems instead of earning a fortune by a performance free speech activism.

I am sorry, but I don't follow — are you saying that Chat Control is a solution to any of these problems?

It achieves the opposite. Undermining encryption under the pretext of "think of the children" won't end well. It only creates more national security risks.

>So instead of speaking from the high ground, please, tell us what your solution about mass disinformation happening from US social media megacorps, Russia mass disinformation, mass recruitment of people for sabotage on critical infrastructure.

Why is the onus of explaining this on the people opposing it? Did any of the proposing politicians ever explain how their plan is going to solve any of these, rather than just being a massive power grab packaged up in "think about the children"? There are plenty of explanations on why this is not going to stop crime, why do you want more explanations and solutions from people telling you this is not going to work, rather than asking the people proposing "how is this going to work"?

What? You don't need VPNs to do anything of that, we have political parties and journalists doing the job from within already

Thank you for your constructive criticism.

> I think the right course of action should be a political activism, not a technological one. Especially when the company doing it makes a fortune.

We tried that. My cofounder and I, as well as several of our colleagues, tried classic political activism in the early 2000s. It became increasingly clear to us that there are many powerful politicians, bureaucrats and special interest groups that don't act in good faith. They lie, abuse their positions, misuse state funds and generally don't care what the population or civil society thinks. They have an agenda, and don't know the meaning of intellectual honesty.

> The course, when one can just disengage from participating in society by sidestepping the problems by either using VPNs in terms of censorship .. is very dangerous and will reinforce the worst trends.

It sounds like you're arguing for censored populations to respect local law, not circumvent censorship through technological means, and only work to remove censorship through political means.

Generally, the more a state engages in online censorship the less it cares about what its population thinks. There are plenty of jurisdictions where political activism will get you jailed, or worse.

Are you seriously suggesting that circumventing state censorship is immoral and wrong?

> So instead of speaking from the high ground, please, tell us what your solution about mass disinformation happening from US social media megacorps, Russia mass disinformation, mass recruitment of people for sabotage on critical infrastructure.

Social media companies make money by keeping people engaged, and it seems the most effective way of doing that is to feed people fear and rage bait. Yes, that's a problem. As is disinformation campaigns by authoritarian states.

Powerful companies have powerful lobbyists, and systematically strive for regulatory capture. Authoritarian states who conduct disinformation campaigns against their population are unlikely to listen to reform proposals from their population.

I don't claim to have a solution for these complex issues, but I'm pretty sure mass surveillance and censorship will make things worse.

> Tell us, how can we keep living in free society when this freedom is being used as a leverage by forces trying to destroy your union.

Political reform through civil discourse cannot be taken for granted. Mass surveillance and censorship violate the principle of proportionality, and do not belong in a free society.

> Please, give us your political solutions to the modern problems instead of earning a fortune by a performance free speech activism.

I'm not sure what you mean by performance. Please clarify.

In the history of humanity, it's never been the side attempting to restrict expression and the flow of information that's been in the right.

You don't "solve" the spread of "disinformation" because it's not a real problem in the first place. What you call "disinformation" is merely an idea with which you disagree. It doesn't matter whether any idea comes from the west, from China, from Russia, or Satan's rectum: it stands on its own and competes on its merits with other ideas in the mind of the public.

An idea so weak that it can survive only by murdering alternative ideas in the cradle is too fragile to deserve existing at all.

When you block the expression of disagreement, you wreck the sense-making apparatus that a civilization uses to solve problems and navigate history. You cripple its ability to find effective solutions for real but inconvenient problems. That, not people seeing the wrong words, is the real threat to public safety.

As we've learned painfully over the past decade, it is impossible for a censor to distinguish falsehood from disagreement. Attempts to purify discourse always and everywhere lead to epistemic collapse and crises a legitimacy. The concept is flawed and any policy intended to "combat the spread of disinformation" is evil.

> So instead of speaking from the high ground, please, tell us what your solution about mass disinformation happening from US social media megacorps, Russia mass disinformation, mass recruitment of people for sabotage on critical infrastructure.

Education. Education. Education. The only thing that ever worked. is Education. Censorship and a total surveillance state aren't an option. Why bother protecting freedom and democracy if you have to destroy freedom and democracy to do so?

And in case of sabotage of critical infrastructure, the answer is three-fold: 1. Apply the law to the saboteurs. 2. Retaliate in asymmetric fashion. We can't sabotage their hospitals but we can stop buying russian oil and gas, take their money and 3. arm ukraine.

> Tell us, how can we keep living in free society when this freedom is being used as a leverage by forces trying to destroy your union.

Are you or have you ever been a communist? We surveived the cold war and the warsaw pact. We can survive a third rate petrol station masquerading as a state.

> Please, give us your political solutions to the modern problems instead of earning a fortune by a performance free speech activism.

Who is earning a fortune here?