• Gamma
    link
    fedilink
    English
    4
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    I feel like the opening sentences explained the reasoning behind the article sufficiently, even when there are plenty of valid use cases for them. This was mostly a response to manipulative marketing tactics:

    Virtual Private Networks, or VPNs, are popular services for (supposedly) increasing your security and privacy on the internet. They are often marketed as all-encompassing security tools, and something that you absolutely need to keep hackers at bay. However, many of the selling points for VPNs are exaggerated or just outright false.

    They’re not the only ones pointing this out, either. Tom Scott released a video on the topic a few years ago to explain his thoughts VPN sponsorships

    • Em Adespoton
      link
      fedilink
      12 years ago

      …and since then, Tom Scott took a NordVPN sponsorship. And possibly SurfShark too?

      He found that it was actually useful while in countries with questionable Internet access.

      Personally, I just host my own VPN, so no matter where I am, all my traffic exits from my home ISP. I figure they’re at least accountable to the same laws I am.

    • @mateomaui@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Your comment in no way negates my observation. If the clickbait title of the article was “You probably don’t need a VPN to avoid market tracking” or something similar, you’d have a point.

      • Gamma
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 years ago

        I was simply adding information your comment had left out, it wasn’t negating information at all. So congrats on getting the point, not everyone is trying to argue 🎉

          • @ConstableJelly@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            Neutral party here, I read it naturally as a supplement to your comment, not an opposition. I don’t detect an argumentative tone personally.

            • @mateomaui@reddthat.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              02 years ago

              You’re welcome to your opinion but these phrases

              I feel like the opening sentences explained the reasoning behind the article sufficiently,

              They’re not the only ones pointing this out, either.

              are oppositional in tone.

                • @mateomaui@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  0
                  edit-2
                  2 years ago

                  I didn’t ask you. I didn’t ask the other neutral guy either. Not my issue that you have a problem with me suggesting the original respondent check his phrasing to make his intention clear, or pointing out the specific phrases that make it unclear.

                  • @cygnus@lemmy.ca
                    link
                    fedilink
                    22 years ago

                    “Everybody on this highway is driving in the wrong lane! What a bunch of idiots!”

      • @rallatsc@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        12 years ago

        This is inaccurate, read the pinned comment on the video where he points out that the opening scene is entirely made up and isn’t about a real person.

          • @rallatsc@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            12 years ago

            The opening scene is a parody of his typical videos (which are typically about places/people) transitioning into a VPN ad segment. The fact that it isn’t about a real person means that it is not in fact from one of his real videos. If you watch the opening scene and read the pinned comment on the video my reply might make more sense.

              • @rallatsc@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                12 years ago

                So he typically advertises for VPNs? I don’t understand.

                He “typically” discusses interesting places/people. In the first 5 or so seconds of the video he discusses a fictitious person and how they “weren’t protected from viruses, but you could be with a VPN”. So he transitions from his typical video style to a VPN ad to then highlight all of the things wrong with VPN ads.