[HN Gopher] The Future of PrivacyTools
___________________________________________________________________
The Future of PrivacyTools
Author : freddyym
Score : 81 points
Date : 2021-07-30 12:55 UTC (10 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.privacytools.io)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.privacytools.io)
| counternotions wrote:
| Weird they are taking this so seriously. I thought this was just
| another one of those spam VPN review sites?
| freddyym wrote:
| I'm sorry you think that we are just one of 'those spam VPN
| review sites'. As a team member, I can assure you that we hate
| them just as much as you. [1]
|
| VPNs used to play a large role in the site (they no longer do),
| but we've never accepted any affiliate requests. (We do however
| operate a sponsorship programe which we are working on making a
| criteria for). [2,3] We have a strict criteria for the few VPNs
| we do list on our site. [4] We strive to educate users on the
| purpose of VPNs [5], and try not to recommend when there are
| other options.
|
| [1] https://blog.privacytools.io/the-trouble-with-vpn-and-
| privac... [2]https://www.privacytools.io/sponsors/
| [3]https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/2134
| [4] https://privacytools.io/providers/vpn/#criteria [5]
| https://blog.privacytools.io/understanding-vpns/
| ignoramous wrote:
| (freddy-m: first-up, thanks for your work on ptio)
|
| I hope the process around _software-suggestions_ gets clearer
| with this move; the backlog has been growing steadily for
| over a year [0] with developers left hanging without any
| follow-up (for ex, a suggestion I submitted hasn 't been
| looked at in over 6 months).
|
| [0] https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/labels/%F
| 0%9...
| freddyym wrote:
| One of the first things we plan on doing with the new
| organisaion is creating a criteria for each section. (We
| already do this for some sections, e.g. email and vpns).
| That way we can just judge each software suggestion against
| our guidelines and bypass all the fuss. And then we can
| focus on more exciting things like expanding the site and
| working on the community.
| aborsy wrote:
| You were wrong.
|
| Their privacy recommendations are good. It's my go-to place,
| and I have been a frequent user.
| fragileone wrote:
| Their privacy suggestions are basically the best around and
| packaged in a pleasant UX.
| freddyym wrote:
| Glad you like the site!
| apecat wrote:
| No, I find them to be a lot more ambitious than that. Worth
| browsing around the site, and you'll see it's not spammy at
| all.
|
| If you run a serious web project, ownership of domain names is
| critical asset management, especially if you care for privacy.
| If the current domain was to get hijacked by someone's
| commercial ambitions, the site would probably be reworked
| towards the kind of BS VPN blabbering you described.
|
| I don't agree with all of PrivacyTools' angles and priorities,
| making a lot of their advice pretty impractical for most
| people. But the purist approach is also interesting to follow,
| even if one doesn't jump on the bandwagon.
| NeckBeardPrince wrote:
| Why did you think that? Did you ever visit the site?
| goodpoint wrote:
| The styling and the stock photos.
| mm983 wrote:
| which stock photos
| kosasbest wrote:
| I have adopted many of the tools found on that site, and the
| novelty of it has worn off. It's rare now that new tools come
| along in the privacy space. It's a bit of a golden age /
| renaissance of privacy tools and there are more than enough tools
| now to be very private online. Some would argue the opposite, but
| if you put the work in, you can avoid the gaze of Big Brother.
| freddyym wrote:
| > I miss the old version of PT where everything was all on one
| page, and I could just save the page for some offline
| reference.
|
| See here: https://privacytools.io/classic/
| kosasbest wrote:
| Brilliant. Thanks.
| kosasbest wrote:
| I just grabbed this with SingleFile[0]
|
| [0] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/single-
| file/?
| mm983 wrote:
| you can also save it as a pdf with cntrl + p
| teddyh wrote:
| > _Please don 't discuss your name suggestions or votes in
| community channels. To avoid exhausting bikeshedding and ensure a
| fair result, we want to make this a blind vote. While we
| obviously can't stop you from discussing it outside of
| PrivacyTools's rooms, we trust that you'll do your part in making
| all of this a smooth process!_
|
| -- https://aragon.cloud/apps/forms/cMPxG9KyopapBbcw
| robcohen wrote:
| Just thought I'd point out that I have a standing PR with
| privacytools from late 2019 and it never went anywhere, even
| though I was careful to ensure everything was done correctly.
|
| https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/pull/1619
|
| After that experience I determined that privacytools is a club
| for cool kids.
| foresto wrote:
| Your PR claims to resolve issue 1618, but an open question in
| that issue is not addressed anywhere that I can see:
|
| "tell more about VyOS and how it is a privacy tool and secure
| and how we won't regret listing it [...] remember citations so
| your research can be confirmed"
|
| Is it possible that the privacytools folks are not willfully
| excluding your suggestion, but merely waiting until they
| understand it? I know what VyOS is, but I don't imagine most
| people do.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Doesn't sound like a great plan really. If I were you I'd work
| harder with the domain owner to get control. It sounds like he's
| just hard to reach, not obstructive as such.
|
| A name change is a huge thing and you're diluting your userbase.
| I also think most of your userbase will consider such name
| changes a bad thing as rebranding is a major marketing tool of
| big business which a lot of us would be sceptical of.
|
| I think you do good work but your name is already perfect.
| kashura wrote:
| What happened to the founder and their involvement?
| freddyym wrote:
| We haven't had proper contact with him for a while. And even
| when he was "available", it was so intermittent that he may as
| well have been absent. (I've been in the team for a year and
| they have logged on to our Matrix chat about three times). This
| affected fundamental tasks like updating the site and having
| our servers for our services work.
| Rd6n6 wrote:
| How is privacy tools operated? What is the organization
| behind it? Is it a business or a group or volunteers?
|
| I've been visiting for years, it's a good site
|
| Edit: looks like it's becoming a business?
|
| > The PrivacyTools team is proud to introduce a suite of
| privacy-centric online services to connect you with other
| privacy-minded individuals and stay safe and secure online.
| No advertisers, no Google Analytics, no tracking, no third-
| party requests of any kind
| freddyym wrote:
| Currently it is a not-for-profit organization, though we
| plan on creating a new legal organization designed around
| the community to ensure our long-term sustainability.
| nugget wrote:
| Does that mean the new site will be for profit and owned
| by the mods?
| Radim wrote:
| Ha! That explains why I never heard back from him in my
| emails.
|
| Freddy, do you mind reaching out to me at radim@pii-
| tools.com? I'd like to discuss options of support /
| partnership, for the (formerly) PrivacyTools.
| freddyym wrote:
| If you wait until the new name is decided, then you can get
| in contact with me via email: hello [at] freddym [dot] xyz
| Radim wrote:
| _Message couldn 't be delivered: "NXDOMAIN Domain name
| not found: freddym.xyz"._
|
| You guys are taking leave-me-alone privacy really
| seriously!
| hundchenkatze wrote:
| Heads up, it looks like your domain has expired:
| Domain Name: FREDDYM.XYZ Registry Domain ID:
| D188258119-CNIC Registrar WHOIS Server:
| whois.tucows.com Registrar URL:
| http://www.tucows.com/ Updated Date:
| 2021-07-13T05:55:57.0Z Creation Date:
| 2020-06-02T10:18:31.0Z Registry Expiry Date:
| 2021-06-02T23:59:59.0Z Registrar: Tucows.com Co.
| Finger_Fudge wrote:
| I don't get it, are they selling out to some big company soon?
| This feels weird. Anyhow, blogs come and go, this isn't going to
| be a big deal.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-30 23:01 UTC)