510
June was a rough month for privacy! (media.piefed.ca)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/privacy@programming.dev
45 comments fedilink hide all child comments
🤡 1
 

c-22 by Gary Anandasangaree. Will introduce 6 month metadata retention for internet service providers and share canadian data with US authorities.

s-209 by Julie Miville-Dechêne. Will introduce age verification.

c-32 by Marc Miller. Second way to introduce age verification. Yes that guy who called privacy critics of c-22 tinfoil hats.

Problems stess pain meme of c-22, s-209 and c-22 bills bullying canadians who want privacy then they hug mullvad vpn only to betrayed by the founder who donates to fascists.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 4 months ago (5 children)

You do you with your wall of text. Others who understand what reliable sources are have been commenting them and I've been able to form an opinion based on reliable information.

I have no qualms about shitting on those with dubious sources. That's how misinformation and propaganda is spread.

Your approval or lack there of means very little to me.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (4 children)

    with dubious sources That’s how misinformation and propaganda is spread.

    Like how you claim a news source you have seen for the first time is unreliable because it is "socialist"? I agree.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    The very fact that they are audited by a media ombudsman however goes on to prove that your previous statement

    “Flamman” however is closer to Alex Jones Info Wars

    does not hold up. I agree with the ethical violations here but your reaction is clearly guided by "socialist news paper" as no one would discredit an entire newspaper just based on two audited violations (and to admit bad reactions to the audits). And the fact that nothing they have said in the previous article (i.e "parasites" or the donations) was fabricated remains.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    I gave you but a selection of reasons why i dont find them reliable. In the other articles i viewed, I found their reporting of events to be obviously angled. Opinion pieces under the guise of being articles.

    Me saying i find them closer to infowars than FOX News is my subjective opinion and where i place them on a scale between those two. It's not a question of it holding up or not.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago

    That is fine, just telling you my opinion that it does not hold up. I agree they are on the aggressive ideology edge side but not on the fact fabricating side (and definitely not the fact we have been discussing).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent