Mulvad ad spotted in London tube
Transcription:
COUNTRIES THAT BAN OR RESTRICT VPN SERVICES: Iran, Belarus, Iraq, North Korea, Turkmenistan, China, Russia, Egypt, India, Myanmar, Oman... United Kingdom?
This is probably referring to this: https://www.independent.co.uk/extras/indybest/gadgets-tech/vpn-ban-uk-b2939311.html
An older post from Mulvad about their issues advertising in the UK: https://mullvad.net/en/and-then/uk
15 replies
Love Mullvad
Yeah right now mulvad is the goat for VPNs.
That's a low bar considering they don't list the ping time for each server and are banned by most websites that screen for VPN's. Nor do they allow port-forwarding. -I say all this while still connected to Mullvad.
Yeah it's just easy to use and cheap. I know it's CIA. So is my ISP. Neither are seriously bound by legality.
Hey! Don't forget Utah! First state in the US pass a VPN ban. Wisconsin came close, but sanity prevailed there. Utah's bill also appears to directly violate the first amendment to the US constitution. It criminalizes certain speech by sites related to giving VPN instructions.
An ad criticizing the UK posted on the metro so it has government approval from the same government I suppose? It gives me bad vibes that it's now gotten so big to have metro ads, I trusted it more when it was a lesser known VPN that no one was pushing on you
I also liked them more when they weren’t popular. Second album is better, move towards keyboards was a mistake, bring back original bassist, went to hell when the drummer died, etc.
I understand what you're saying, but as long as they keep operating in the same way while gaining users it's better for everyone. More users means more privacy because it gets harder to tell traffic from different users apart.
Their server list always made this statement implicitly. I'm glad they're getting more into the blatant fed marketing since people will be able to see it.
Yikes what's with the ?
Are they implying the UK genocide regime is better than the other countries?
It's pretty obvious they are asking if the UK is next to block VPNs.
That said, I will agree that there is a second layer meaning. "These are the sorts of governments you will be aligning with following this policy".
The UK is/was a colonial power. Usually those oppress people outside the country, but keep the people within relatively happy. Rights for the internal group but not external ones. A form of profiteering and oppression.
By comparison, most of the countries listed here crack down regularly on the rights of people within their country, and this is the direction the UK goes in when they ban protests and privacy.
Oppression is oppression, and oppression is bad.
There are also many criminal uses for hammers. You don't ban hammers.
Prosecute the crime, don't ban the tool.
I understand where you're coming from, but the establishment will use any excuse to ban all forms of privacy on the premise that someone may commit a crime.
I don't know man.
Your conept of "the dark web" isnt what you think it is if you think its used for "not much else" than the 'bad' things mentioned.
If you use a vpn for any real reason that actually requires one then you'd understand what losing that vpn means. It sounds more like you view it as a commodity and therefore the negatives outweigh the positives, whereas others view it as a necessity for privacy.
Any version of the "i dont have anything to hide" argument is wrong. Including the "other people do bad things so im willing to give up everyone elses privacy for that".
Banning VPNs has been discussed in parliament, is being consulted on currently, and has not been ruled out
There are many criminal use cases for the internet itself even without a VPN. Should we just ban the internet?