Re: So, recommendations?
I went with Mullvad based on the thorough review by "That One Privacy Guy", who seems trustworthy... Still, I was comforted in my choice when I learned that Mozilla teamed up with Mullvad to offer their vpn service!
12 posts • joined 25 Oct 2017
Johnson may lie as much as Trump but he allegedly has no actual ideology and his buffoonery is carefully crafted to make him more relatable to non-Oxbridge folks, while Trump is about as knowledgeable as his base…
I don't know if this makes things better, I guess we'll soon find out.
"Presidents these days are just high-class salespeople."
Did you not mean to write exactly the opposite? Some presidents/leaders may show some kind of reserved decorum (a varnish which may very well hide some nasty covert deeds) but these days, it’s seems the current trend is: the more crass, vulgar and/or blatantly corrupt, the better. Or may I’m watching the wrong kind of fake news :)
"That One Privacy Guy" who's behind "That One Privacy Site" seems legit. As he points out, most sites reviewing VPNs also publish VPN adverts, which you may think is a bit of a problem, whereas his site has no ads whatsoever - he's not opposed to donations if some of his readers are so inclined....
Also his reviews of VPNs are pretty comprehensive, if not always very up to date.
I went with his top choice "Mullvad" and I'm fairly happy with it, though it does not fool the BBC.
To me the greatest problem with this list is that each factor is summed up with a single figure, obtained from only one or two sources of information: probably not totally meaningless, but clearly not very meaningful… And incidentally, are the sources even trustworthy?
According to https://www.ariase.com/fr/news/couverture-fibre-thd-grand-lyon-testez-article-5196.html, 62% of homes in Lyon are eligible to fibre access.
You also have the option of cable, which is more widely available, offers speeds up to 1Gbps up and 60 Mbps down and is fairly cheap… but is also tied to the worse ISP/telecom company (https://www.thelocal.fr/20180308/and-the-worst-mobile-phone-and-tv-operator-in-france-is).
I remember reading Andrew Orlowski’s piece https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/06/02/google_oracle_comment/ two years ago making the case for the Java copyright to be enforced – and at the same time successfully predicting today’s legal outcome.
The article gives a small example of the code that Google allegedly copied from Java (https://regmedia.co.uk/2010/10/28/oracle_google_code_comparison_large.png) and it’s clearly not an interface but an actual implementation.
This makes Oracle’s win much more sensible to my hardly biased (I really don’t care for either party), law-illiterate mind. But then I'm wondering what the outrage is all about: am I missing something obvious here?
This kind of news reminds me that I'm eagerly waiting for my order of Tim O'Reilly's "WTF? What’s the Future and Why It’s Up to Us". In a 90 minutes podcast mostly dedicated to his latest book, he shares with Jason Calacanis his less than deliriously enthusiastic views on financial capitalism and tech giants. All of this nonsense might not last much longer…
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021