• Jumpingspiderman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 hours ago

    I seem to remember that Switzerland has a history of profiting from their relationships with Nazi’s. Thus they might not be a good source of advice as to what to do about Nazi’s.

    • BothsidesistFraud@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 hour ago

      It’s dumb to call Trump a nazi and the populist wing of the Republican party nazis.

      It’s not even clever at this point, maybe it was edgy and transgressive like 7 years ago.

      The reason it’s dumb is that you are wasting all of your powerful language and you will have no more if things get worse. Boy who cried wolf. Just like people did to racist which used to carry great power and now is basically meaningless as a powerful descriptor.

      • GlacialTurtle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        24 minutes ago

        It’s not even clever at this point, maybe it was edgy and transgressive like 7 years ago.

        Are you really this childish that you genuinely think the only reason people might suggest Trump is a fascist is because it was “edgy and transgressive”? Not the fascist rhetoric, increasingly fascist policy and the various fascists he’s willing to work with and support?

        • BothsidesistFraud@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          21 minutes ago

          Nazism is a very small subset of fascism, they are not equivalent. Nazi also carries VERY heavy baggage which is inapplicable to Trump. Use the right terms.

          • GlacialTurtle@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            14 minutes ago

            Hey guys, look at this dipshit, drawing irrelevant distinctions and pointlessly trying to police other peoples language because they think the only reason others would use those terms is because they’re “edgy and transgressive”.

            Tell me, where on the fascism to nazism meter is mass deportations, muslim bans, endorsing far right militias, supporting running over protestors, palling around with white supremacists, and seeking to eradicate trans people from public life? Are we at .49? or is it more like .76? My readings seems to be off. Just so I know I’m not using the incorrect terms so some moron from .world doesn’t get mad and try to incessantly police terms on the internet.

    • ERROR: Earth.exe has crashed@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 hour ago

      No, I would not describe him as a trump supporter. I would say that he’s a right-wing “Libertarian” tech-bro that has no clue about American politics, just spewing his uneducated bs because he thinks he’s some genius. He might be a CERN scientist, but he’s a dumbass when it comes to American politics.

      (But it is concerning to have such an idiot on the board of the Proton Foundation)

      • sudoer777@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        33 minutes ago

        Considering how he runs a business whose goal is to capture the privacy crowd and how a large portion of the privacy crowd is made up of those “Libertarian” tech-bro types, it might be more than just “no clue about American politics”, especially since he’s also doing stuff like promoting Bitcoin through Proton Wallet which is also popular among “Libertarian” tech-bro types, and the article used for marketing that both-sidesed the problems the “left” vs “right” experience and equated the Democrats with the “left”, which is popular among “Libertarian” tech-bro types as well. The 88 in his Reddit username is also suspect regardless of him claiming that it’s there because it’s his birth year. People who know how to operate a business usually aren’t doing it out of stupidity, so I’m not going to give him the benefit of the doubt on this, especially since the entire platform depends on trusting that they aren’t doing anything shady.

  • kreskin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    4 hours ago

    Sounds like the CEO of proton doesnt understand the basic privacy concerns for the US VPN market. He should really look that up someday-- theres money to be made in the Us market if he cared enough.

  • ShareMySims@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    150
    ·
    11 hours ago

    I can’t be the only one who struggled to read that, and for general accessibility purposes since I’m already here:

    Image ID:

    andy1011000 Proton CEO posted:

    “People honestly seem to forget that I live in Switzerland, where Republican/Democrat doesn’t mean anything, and Trump isn’t even on our ballot to be voted for…”

    Onyx376. replied:

    “The point is that fighting for a more just and equal society is not just about fighting for the fundamental right to privacy but also for all other fundamental rights, including individual rights and life. When you, as the CEO of a company that starts from these principles, nod positively to whatever action a political figure like Trump, who is known for always flagrantly putting his private interests ahead of those of his own nation, makes speeches about eliminating minorities, hurting their rights as citizens and flirting with Nazi movements, it is understandable that members of the privacy community are disappointed as this reveals a little about who is being the face of a company that should follow contrary principles. But now we really know what “freedom” means to you.”

  • Gammelfisch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    6 hours ago

    The motherfucker lives in Switzerland and he supports Putin’s Sock Puppet. Fuck Andy. The USA will regress further away from the Swiss standard of living, which is what the USA should be striving for.

  • AnAmericanPotato@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Ridiculous.

    He specifically started talking about American party politics, unprompted, making sweeping statements about both Democrats and Republicans. NOW he wants to blame us for…being concerned with his views on American party politics? Dude. Get real.

    Saying stupid shit now and then is forgivable, but not if you take it in as the new nucleus of your public image. Why do so many public figures have this compulsion to double down combatively?

  • ShareMySims@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Now to reply to the post itself, I think this sums it up:

    As we say in Germany, if there's a Nazi at the table and 10 other people sitting there talking to him, you got a table with 11 Nazis.

    Though the sad truth is that almost every single product or service we use are owned and run by people with similar opinions, it is literally the nature of the capitalist beast, it’s how it function, and why it will always decay in to fascism - because those with the power and the money (not just those at the very very top, but several levels bellow them, too, like this guy) will always and forever care solely about maintaining it and creating more for themselves, that’s it. And to do that, they have to side with whichever dictator-du-jour benefits them the most.

    Remember - there is no ethical consumption under capitalism, and this is only one of the reasons why.

    • ZeroCool@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      11 hours ago

      He’s well on his way to reaching Muskian levels of failure to shut the hell up.

  • Onyx376@lemmy.mlOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i2ff6q/call_for_andy_yen_to_resign/

    UPDATE: Andy Reply

    According to Andy’s logic, if Hitler were the president of some unfortunate country, we should differentiate the boss from his good nominees. Even using a company founded by an entire community to show a good evaluation made by one of its founders to give him a loving pat on the back and show the world that he is not completely bad as they think, but not meaning that the founder agrees with all his innocent actions, of course, such as disregarding the rights of many people around the world because they are just part of the democratic game.

    • sudneo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 hours ago

      So, to get this straight, for you it’s impossible to recognize that a pick for a position is a good pick in the Trump government, by definition, without consideration of the actual pick?

      To me this is religion, not politics or ideology (which I both consider very good things). To be even more clear, I consider Andy’s position completely rational and legitimate in this case. I believe it’s absolutely legitimate to be happy Trump picked someone good for a position and at the same time not support the rest 98%. At most, the interesting debate is why that pick is not good, which is 100% opinable and worthy of a discussion.

      But saying that any statement, in any context, whatever narrow and specific equal full support is completely insane to me.

      • Senal@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        If all he said was literally “i approve of this pick for this position” you’d be correct.

        What actually happened was he approved of the pick and also claimed the republicans are now actually the party that stands for the “little guy”.

        Then followed up with a non apology that claimed what he said was not intended to be a “political statement”.

        by all means, argue that you think there’s a fuss over nothing, but if you leave important context out seemingly because it doesn’t suit your narrative it weakens your argument substantially.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          I know what happened, I followed quite thoroughly.

          He thinks that republicans are now the ones with a higher chance to push antitrust cases against big tech (I.e., work for the little guy - EDIT: source). He thinks this based on the last few years and a few things that happened. He likes the nomination from Trump. How is this a full support to Trump? How believing that republicans will do better - in this area - equals being a Nazi?

          Of course I believe that there is a fuss over nothing. The above statement has been inflated and I have already read “he applauded to Trump antitrans policies”, " posted Nazi symbols" and other complete fantasies.

          Many people, who are on the internet on a perpetual witch hunt decided to interpret a clearly specific tweet (about antitrust and big tech) as a global political statement, and read that “little guy” as “common man” or - I have read it here on Lemmy - “working class”. Basically everyone tried to propose ideas about why that post was so awful, rather than first trying to understand what the hell he meant. I will agree the first tweet is ambiguous, but that’s because it’s a 200 characters tweet, he then explained his position quite clearly, and the summary above is what he actually meant.

          This “context” added doesn’t move my post a centimeter IMO.

          • Yozul@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            While it’s certainly true that some of the people who are angry at him for that tweet are saying things in their anger that are overboard, I think only pointing out the most ridiculous things that people who disagree with you have ever said in their anger is a really terrible way of engaging honestly on the subject.

            It’s important to remember that an authoritarian that always figured out what the right thing to do was and did the opposite of that would be a really bad authoritarian. Republicans at the state level have been increasing state surveillance to hunt down and punish people for choices they make with their own bodies. For a lot of people in America, Trump is the head of the organization that they want privacy to protect themselves from, and the current largest threat to privacy in America.

            For the CEO of a company that is supposedly about protecting our privacy to completely unprompted start publicly praising decisions made by the very threat we’re supposed to trust them to protect us from, and then to double down on their praise when called out, is deeply concerning.

            Yes. It’s true that not every single thing Trump does will be the worst possible thing, but his goals are fundamentally opposed to ours. When I say I want big tech to be broken up it’s because I want their to be less concentration of power. When Trump wants to break up big tech it’s because he wants to eliminate the competition to his concentration of power. That is not worthy of my praise, even if in any one particular instance the thing he is doing is similar to what I would do, and the fact that the CEO of Proton either doesn’t understand this or doesn’t care is deeply concerning. I do not trust them after this, and I doubt they can ever get that trust back.

          • Senal@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            See, now that’s a more thorough explanation of your position.

            I disagree with pretty much all of your assertions (though the witch hunt stuff can be true sometimes) , but at least i know I’m disagreeing with an opinion formed using the whole of the information provided.

            This “context” added doesn’t move my post a centimeter IMO.

            It shows you read the initial information in it’s entirety and still came to the conclusion you did.

            That removes the possibility of responses such as “Did you even read the initial tweet?”.

            Well… it should remove that possibility, in practice it just means you can safely ignore those responses because clearly the people making those responses haven’t read your response in it’s entirety.

    • CaptSneeze@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      12 hours ago

      “People forget I don’t live in China. Just because I praise Mao for wanting to shed the yoke of cultural tradition, doesn’t mean I necessary support everything he’s doing…” -Andy, if this was 1966

    • _____@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      le false equivalence totally validates my endorsement for the worst president elected in US history

    • refalo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      36
      ·
      edit-2
      10 hours ago

      Honestly I find his attitude to be quite commendable and I think that speaks much louder than whatever it is you disagree with.

      Maybe he should have just left Trump’s name out of it entirely as that seems to be what really pushed people’s buttons.

      People are going to twist things around no matter what is said though. Don’t forget hindsight makes everyone look guilty.

      • KinglyWeevil@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        It would be one thing if Trump was actually anti-trust…but he isn’t.

        He’s anti companies which don’t prostrate themselves in front of him and bow to his whims. They’re bad, terrible, anti American companies. The ones that do are great, wonderful, beautiful companies. The bad ones need to be broken up and given to the big ones.

        He’s so transparent it’s painful. If someone says good things about Trump or give him money, they’re good. If they don’t, they’re bad. It’s absurdly obvious.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          If that motivation still leads to work against tech monopolies, good. Can’t wait for people to do the right thing for the right reason. If that won’t happen it will be criticized as a lack of action.

          Ultimately the benefit for the population is having as much freedom and fair competition in the tech space as possible. If that comes from Trump hallucinations, from a dream or from something else, who cares…?

      • Doomsider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        He should have just stayed the fuck out of Americans politics being a provider of a secure service that many Americans of all political persuasions use.

        He is an idiot who cost his company business. The only spin is trying to downplay it at this point. The consequences are lost profits.

        • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          8 hours ago

          Let’s be real. You mean he should have stayed out of it if he was going to voice an opinion that doesn’t match yours. People don’t want apolitical, they want an echo chamber.

          • Doomsider@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 hours ago

            No, he should stay out of either side because business is about making money. I don’t want to know what politics you support. I don’t care for politicizing everything. It is a fucking turn off.

            You want my money, do your job, sell me your product, give me your service, but don’t talk to me about your hot takes on politics. Also religion as well. I and many many other people don’t want to hear it.

            • howrar@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Better that they tell us imo. If someone thinks that the people I care about don’t deserve to exist for reasons no one can control, I’d rather know and avoid giving them money than to help them quietly gain influence and power until they can eradicate these people themselves.

              • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 hours ago

                There is a certain logic to this. I tend to agree that I would like to know. I also think I would probably find out I would have to be self sufficient if I truly did not want to give to bad actors.

            • _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Your comment might hold a valid argument, if your previous comments hadn’t made it perfectly clear you take issue with the fact he praised something a politician you don’t like has done.

              • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 hours ago

                Whether you agree with my character or not what I said was accurate for any business person/enterprise. It is really not beneficial and increases risk unnecessarily.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        Maybe he should have just left Trump’s name out of it entirely as that seems to be what really pushed people’s buttons.

        It probably didn’t help, but no, I don’t think that was it. I think it was his sweeping generalizations about dems/republicans as a whole, along with the insinuation that dems were bought, republicans are “looking out for the little guys”, and the election undermined the will of the people:

        Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost. Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          You are right about the generalization on parties, but the “little guy” he meant are small tech companies opposed to big tech. It was clear to me in the context, and to clear any doubt, he explicitly said that in a reddit comment.

          I want to specify because this has been stretched on here as far as “he said republicans care for the working class”.

  • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    edit-2
    11 hours ago

    Brother we’ve been arming and supporting a full-on ethnic extermination and bombing anyone who tries to stop it for over a year now. We’re past flirting with fascism, we’ve bought a dog and moved onto a studio apartment with fascism. Fascism is making us coffee and thinking about opening an Etsy store to sell all the gold tooth fillings.

  • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    12 hours ago

    He’s kind of right on the money and kind of being completely dumb.

    The fact of it is that Republicans don’t want to help privacy or take down big tech’s abuses, they want to make it worse. All of the reasonable things Andy has said have taken place past that, so in a way the entire conversation is talking past the point.

    The question is, how can somebody so influential at a major privacy company not have such a pre-school understanding of major world figures’ relationships to his core business?