proton does not advertise themselves as anonymous email.

So, i just checked, and they actually do (albeit with caveats, including not using your name when signing up, but no mention of when paying) here and here among other places.

I see also that those pages are promulgating exactly the “anonymity vs. privacy” false dichotomy that you are. Proton writes (emphasis mine):

Privacy means controlling who receives specific information. In the email context, this means encrypting your message so no one besides its intended recipient and you can read it — not even the service provider.

Their very narrowly-scoped definition of the word privacy is inconsistent with how most of the world uses the word. Proton is defining email privacy to mean solely the confidentiality of the body of the message (which they also provide a trivial-for-them-to-circumvent protection of, incidentally) but the word “privacy” elsewhere (eg, in law, technology, academia, and colloquially) has a much broader meaning.

Or, to put it more simply: Category:Anonymity is (literally) a subcategory of Category:Privacy.

Proton isn’t even consistent in their own usage of their absurdly-narrow definition of privacy: in their How to send an anonymous email guide they write:

Where your email provider is based affects your privacy. Privacy laws can vary dramatically, and some countries have data retention laws that require companies to store and hand over sensitive user data. Email services based in a privacy-friendly countries, like Switzerland, can offer stronger protections.

Do you think by “privacy” and “sensitive user data” they’re only talking about the body of email messages here, as per their earlier definition?

And, regardless of whether or not a company advertises its services for anonymity (as Proton does, it turns out): after clicking the above links and thinking about it a little more, do you still think that retaining and revealing links between users’ pseudonyms and legal identities is really not a privacy issue?

given that Swiss law means complying with MLAT requests from many countries including the US, why do you think Proton chooses to retain data linking user accounts with payment identities?

if you stick a privacy fence up around your house, does it make you anonymous? of course not, because privacy does not mean anonymous. you should not blame someone else because you are confused on the difference between privacy and anonymity.

i am not confused at all about “the difference between privacy and anonymity”; the former is a broader concept which includes the latter. Privacy regarding one’s identity (or avoiding revealing the link between related identities, which is what is usually meant by “anonymity”) is one of many types of privacy.

Proton mail advertises that their service is designed for “privacy”, not “privacy except not with regards to your legal identity which we decided to needlessly retain information about and which you should obviously expect us to give to the authorities upon request”.

where did you get the notion that “privacy” excludes “anonymity”? this is not a rhetorical question, i am interested to know because I see these “difference between privacy and anonymity” comments frequently lately and i wonder where this meme originated.

now that i’ve linked you to the paywall bypass and pointed out that it is a credible journalist and outlet reporting that Proton confirmed that this happened, why not update your post title to match the article’s accurate headline?

your instance has a list of communities federated to it here: https://piefed.zip/communities

the most active community for announcing new communities is !newcommunities@lemmy.world (which includes communities on many different instances, not only .world)

Why do you think Proton stores the association between accounts and payment identity?

Many privacy-oriented companies actually accept credit card payments and simply don’t store that information.

article in case you can’t read it: https://lemmy.ml/post/44086795

that link only has two paragraphs of the article; there are 8 more in the full article here on archive.org

OP, why did you put “news media claims” at the beginning of this post title? are you doubting the veracity of it? the journalist and outlet reporting this are both well known and reputable, and they have quotes from Proton’s head of communications confirming it.

Btw, you can read the whole article here on archive.org.

Proton chooses to retain data associating accounts with personal information from credit card payments, and they choose to advertise Swiss legal jurisdiction as a privacy feature.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_bustards

This post caused me to look up what changed: sadly they aren’t exiting the consumer space but rather are just ceasing to include lane-keeping in their basic package to instead require new customers who want it to pay a monthly subscription fee for what they amusingly call “Full Self Driving (Supervised)”.

is it time for a Windows edition of the classic Jamiroquai sound meme?

howard’s awkward canard

If you are not able to rationally argue why we shouldn’t be bigoted, I don’t know what to tell you.

it’s not that people can’t, but spaces which have unlimited tolerance for sealions suggesting that it’s necessary to argue about that are likely to have less interesting discussions than spaces which do not 🙄

But don’t call it an anarchist space

tell me you’ve never been in a non-internet anarchist space without telling me 😂

(hint: offline anarchist bars tend not to tolerate fascists either)

rules of anarchism

😭

(this is a bit, right?)

It’s ironic you state it like this, since we are an explicitly anarchist server ;)

it’s not really ironic as i am well aware that you are and i appreciate you for that :)

what i’m saying is that i’m glad that, despite obviously being a (fellow!) proponent of freedom of expression, you haven’t fallen victim to the childish line of thought which leads some people to let their spaces become nazi bars. so: thanks!

unmoderated internet spaces are quickly overrun with bigotry, csam, and spam.

if, in the name of “free speech”, you only moderate the csam and spam, the space will be primarily occupied by people looking for a forum that welcomes bigotry.

respect to @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com for rm’ing bigotry and not letting childish anarchist free speech ideals cause lemmy.dbzer0.com to be a nazi bar 🥂

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathological_demand_avoidance

As for the significance of Melania Trump presiding over the Security Council meeting, Dujarric called it “a sign of the importance that the United States feels towards the Security Council and the subject.”

🤔

Ivanka Trump attended the UNGA and had meetings there but did not preside over it.

could Red Hat eventually take control of the project

Fedora started in 2002 and merged with “Red Hat Linux” in 2003.

Red Hat, Inc has had full control of it ever since then.

It is a “community project” inasmuch as there are Fedora developers who are volunteers (and some who are paid by companies other than Red Hat), and the Fedora Council includes people who are not employed by Red Hat - but the Project Leader is always a Red Hat employee, and if the Council ever has an irreconcilable difference with Red Hat then Red Hat can simply ignore and/or dismiss them.

Red Hat owns all Fedora-related trademarks, and the Fedora Project is not an independent legal entity: it is a part of Red Hat.

If Fedora developers don’t like Red Hat’s decisions regarding the project, they can fork it but they’d need to change the name and find some other sources funding.

Also, icymi, Red Hat became a subsidiary of IBM in 2019.