• Anonymouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    What’s the deal with VPNs? I noticed many instances don’t work over VPN but didn’t know where to ask.

  • jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’m deeply concerned about their anticrypto discussion stance. Digital fungible money is a key component of any privacy discussion.

    Many privacy focused services accept payments in crypto, such as vpns, web hosting, email services, etc

    Not being able to discuss this axis of digital exposure is antithetical to a healthy discourse about privacy.

          • LWD@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 months ago

            I forgot about the contents of some of those. An extra ironic message to a sex worker:

            We like to see you get fucked too. What is your Monero tip address?

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Monero is the gold standard for that very reason.

        I accept the policies of DBZer0, That’s why I didn’t start this discussion on their instance.

        My core thesis still stands, a discussion about privacy must include all options, including private fungible digital money

        Moving all of the privacy discussion to a place where the privacy discussion is limited to a subset of things that are private. It’s probably not good for the privacy community

          • jet@hackertalks.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            Perhaps, but i’m bound by the instances rules.

            This is the fediverse, you are not bound to an instance

              • jet@hackertalks.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                We are here, on lemmy.world, redirecting people to the community on DBZer0. That is why I’m concerned

                The discussion is about the right home for privacy discussions. I’m happy that privacy@dbzer0 exists, but I am disturbed that we are trying to consolidate all conversations to a community that does not allow all conversations.

                • Blaze@lemmy.zipOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  a community that does not allow all conversations.

                  LW has blocked !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com, how do you think they’ll react if people start asking “which VPN should I use to be anonymous and torrent”?

                  As I said in another comment, crypto can be discussed in another community.

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m ok with people promoting services which accept cryptocurrencies (hell, Lemmy itself accepts crypto donations). However promoting cryptocurrencies itself is a no-no in our instance.

        Also: Crypto is a not private. The blockchain is public.

        • jet@hackertalks.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Crypto is a not private. The blockchain is public.

          Not necessarily true for all ledgers, such as monero.

          https://www.getmonero.org/get-started/faq/#anchor-different

          Monero uses three different privacy technologies: ring signatures, ring confidential transactions (RingCT), and stealth addresses. These hide the sender, amount, and receiver in the transaction, respectively. All transactions on the network are private by mandate; there is no way to accidentally send a transparent transaction. This feature is exclusive to Monero. You do not need to trust anyone else with your privacy.

          • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            Monero users can and have been deanonymized by the police. Monero also acts as a de-facto tumbler, meaning by using it, you’re money laundering for criminals as a matter of course.

          • LWD@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Crypto is a not private. The blockchain is public.

            Not necessarily true for all ledgers, such as monero.

            Necessarily true for Monero. Theirs is public too, freely available for anyone to download and analyze. The rest of your response did not refute this. An honest response might have been “transactions are public, but…” and you could have laid out your rebuttal, but denying a fact and following it up with irrelevant PR does not make me more confident in the project.

            That, and the simple explanation that evangelizing Monero has a perverse incentive I hadn’t even considered (it benefits money launderers in addition to speculators) makes me trust it all the less.

            • jet@hackertalks.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m not trying to defend monero here, but the ability to have a conversation about such things.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        but not to promote cryptocurrencies themselves

        My core complaint still stands, digital fungible money is part of the privacy conversation. Especially threat modeling for people.

        • Blaze@lemmy.zipOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          2 months ago

          Personally it’s okay with me. Feel free to have a look at the previous thread (https://feddit.org/post/6950586), but long story short

          Lemmy.dbzer0 has a very good record of stability and management. If we need to discuss crypto in a dedicated discussion, why not. To be fair, I expect some backlash of any pro-crypto discussions in a general privacy community anyway.