Privacy

5648 readers

104 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

Be civil
No spam posting
Keep posts on-topic
No trolling

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

iopq@lemmy.world

-1

[Meta] !privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com is under new management, feel free to join us there (lemmy.zip)

submitted 2 months ago by Blaze@lemmy.zip to c/privacy@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

!privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com

Hello everyone,

After a discussion on !fedigrow@lemm.ee ( https://feddit.org/post/6950586 ), a few people interested in privacy decided to reopen !privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com as an alternative to !privacy@lemmy.ml .

It's also nice to have a privacy community on an instance that can be accessed via VPNs.

Feel free to join us there!

top 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Blaze@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Hello @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com @unruffled@lemmy.dbzer0.com, could you please clarify?

From what I understood, promoting privacy services which allow to pay in crypto is OK, but not to promote cryptocurrencies themselves?

[–] jet@hackertalks.com 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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.zip 1 points 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

LW is not ideal as they don't allow VPNs
lemmy.ml is known for admins powertripping https://feddit.nl/post/16246531
programming.dev recently had federation issues (still do based on my last posts on !privacy@programming.dev )
lemmy.one's admins are always silent

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.

[–] db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 months ago (1 children)

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 1 points 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.

[–] Anonymouse@lemmy.world 1 points 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.