Let's draw this to its ultimate conclusion.

Would you subscribe to an excellent VPN service, if it was run by [insert universally abhorred brutal dictator from history here]?

▲

yaris 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

A thought experiment:

Let's think of the other extreme as well: exactly the same excellent VPN service, is run by an almost-the-best-person-in-the-world who has just one small quirk that makes them not 100% perfect for you (they pat kittens not as often as you'd like them to do). Obviously there is a border between your extreme and mine, which border defines "use" and "no use" cases for you. And now: wherever this border is - should it be the same for everyone?

	▲	leokennis 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I agree there might be a more or les arbitrary border, and it will probably be in different places for different people. However the original statement: > The CEO’s extracurricular activities are none of my business. Basically says that no border should exist, and it makes no difference at all who provided the service as long as the service itself is excellent. That is a fundamentally different argument that I very much disagree with.
	▲	loloquwowndueo 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Every time you use a kitten to support flawed logic, a kitten dies.
	▲	microgpt 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I don't really understand the point you're trying to make with that thought experiment.

▲

belorn 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We can easier look at conclusion people make about banks and stock options. Will people invest money into index fonds and pension fonds if those fonds invest money into companies that produce and sell weapons to abhorred brutal dictators? What about buying stocks from telecommunication producers who operate in abhorred brutal dictatorships and who helps those dictators to control their population?

▲

30 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

iamnothere 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Next iteration of this smear article: “Mullvad is basically HitlerVPN”

▲

rationalist 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Someone doesn't want people using the best VPN available, hmm...

▲

microgpt 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Why can't we have a VPN run by normal people?

	▲	unsupp0rted 29 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Because there are almost no normal people. Everybody's a jerk in private, to somebody, sometime. Everybody's got opinions that half the population doesn't like.
	▲	iamnothere 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Because normal people don’t want to deal with the headaches. Your choices are weird people or intelligence cutouts. (Or abandoning any attempt at privacy in an attempt to be ideologically pure.) Sorry, but those are the options.