naevaTheRat

Using a condom doesn't require trusting a third party to keep you out of gaol, and has lots of regulatory industry around it guaranteeing quality.

VPN companies are not ideological projects, they are businesses bound by the laws in the countries they operate in optimising for profit. They will abuse your trust if it makes them money or frees them from criminal liability.

Assuming the government defs doesn't care and wont cooperate with lawsuits.

Yes and no. Knowing your IP is sort of like knowing a PO box you rent. It can be used to try and transmit stuff to you, it can also be crudely geolocated, or if the person you're buying it from gives you up it can be traced directly to you as a person.

If someone wanted to, and you had terrible safety practices (such as opening mail you aren't expecting, the digital equivalent would be having software listening to ports) they could send you something harmful but this is probably not very likely unless you are pissing powerful people off (e.g. you're using that IP to distribute anti mossad documentaries or something :P). Your biggest threat is that somebody finds out who you are by going to your ISP and making them give you up.

If you are confident that this is very high effort and you are a small fish it's not much of a risk.

If you actually need privacy you should use something like tor, or a box which you have access to that can't or wont be traced to you (e.g. you have access to someone else's by covert means, you bought a server with cash in the mail, you bought a server in a nation that will never cooperate with the nation you're antagonising) which you tunnel to and use as a proxy.

A VPN is not necessarily very secure and doesn't mitigate the most serious threats like phone home programs that will ID you over the clearnet later. Trusting a VPN is extremely dicey and should absolutely not be relied upon to keep you out of gaol. It's better than nothing, but shouldn't be over emphasised.

Sorry, could you be a little more explicit in terms of how you're answering my questions? I don't really want to get drawn in to some aimless rambling bullshit.

I haven't mentioned tribalism, I don't even know what you're referring to or why you're bringing it up.

I don't know what you mean by how society is these days. Are you saying society has changed fundamental human nature? what is the relevance please?

With an authority or controlling wealth, everything results in an elite of some form to try keep a system in place, and that's the start of failure.

you're talking to an anarchist so I have no disagreement there. I do wonder if you've ever read Marx though. Could you please honestly answer with what publications of his you've actually read? if none, what publications about Marxism have you read? if that list is exhaustive the three most recent?

If a village of 100 has just 1 asshole, things can be ruined. Scale up to global populations and you've got your answer. No ism can keep the psychopathic, narcissistic, or competitive nature of these people from ruining whatever ism it is you'd like to have.

???

So there's a very big difference between X hasn't happened yet and X is factually impossible. Imagine standing there in 1750s and saying "we know for a fact that the human species is fundamentally incompatible with flight". Very shortly you would look like the complete arse that making that statement made you.

I don't dispute nobody has achieved the utopia Marx hypothesised, that is trivial to demonstrate, I'm asking how on earth you would establish fundamental incompatibility.

Actually the current prevailing theory is that primitive communism was the state humans lived in before the founding of the first proto states, so if anything your stance should be that evidence suggests humans are fundamentally compatible with communism, unless you mean to argue we have undergone some shift in our fundamental nature in which case I would again ask where your evidence is.

But what we know for fact is that the human species is incompatible with communism

Sorry what? How on earth would such a thing even be established as fact? This is a very bold claim.

Communism has failed every time.

I'm always really interested in what people mean when they say this. Is it that no organisation that has tried has managed to realise the utopia Marx predicted? Is it that they tend to lose wars with the USA? Is it that great suffering has occurred?

What is a system that has not failed? Like it's pretty apparent whatever we're doing now isn't working. We're in a mass extinction, the climate is destabilising, homelessness and sickness exist alongside people that personally own jet aircraft.

Genuinely I would love to know what specifically you mean because I see this a lot and it confuses the hell out of me.

Hopeful aside btw. Lord of the flies basically happened once except the kids all banded together and helped each other because humans are actually extremely pro social. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/may/09/the-real-lord-of-the-flies-what-happened-when-six-boys-were-shipwrecked-for-15-months

whimper was a dovecot and postfix machine. Email isn't very fun

I don't have many now, just minstrel (it plays music) but previously they've always just be sounds. Rawr, groan, whimper, bark, moan, growl etc.

Except minstrel (it plays music) :p

Nice argument there, but you see you typed something wrong at 2 am therefore I will not engage.

I am so smart and cultured.

He's a multi millionaire who admits to still eating red meat despite having the funds to hire a professional chef to make delicious plant based meals every meal. He also admits to eating chickens while decrying it.

Fuck me for holding people with more power to higher standards I guess.

He's also intensely classist and has deeply problematic views about overpopulation. Doing the very British thing of talking about too many African people while completely ignoring the massively asymmetric resource consumption that he takes part it.

I just think if you're one of the most privileged people on the planet and you think the world is dying you ought to live a life which if the average person lived would be sustainable. Not do some token effort, far below that of your average poor person, and claim that's all you can manage.