They screwed up, admitted it, apologized, don’t see why people are calling for blood anymore. People are allowed to make mistakes, they owned it and they cut ties with the guy.
They keep making right wing mistakes though. I think that points to something.
what’s a left wing mistake that they might get called out for?
Lots of other companies seem to easily avoid voicing support for fascists both directly with their own words or via sponsorship money. Weird how Proton can’t seem to figure it out. If they can’t even get the little stuff right why would I trust them with my data?
why would I trust them with my data
because proton is highly regarded among privacy experts.
and i’m guessing most privacy experts dgaf about politics like most technology experts don’t.
If we just look at browsers:
- Chrome: funded by Google, plenty of fascist moves like making deals with Israel
- Mozilla: funded by Google and promotes Google as search engine, so same deal
- Ladybird: https://nitter.net/awesomekling/status/1966456391146606806
Plenty of big companies have supported fascists in one way or another
*ChatGPT apologized
Do you actually think it’s okay that they had a bot make a press release this hamfisted?
Bold claim, corroborated with no proof.
Sure it looks like AI speech patterns, but they are trained on corporate speech, so hard to differentiate an LLM from a corporate spokesperson.
How tf did I get downvoted for saying it sounds like AI bullshit? Who are these people who actually object to my assessment? I feel like I’m living in the upside down
Do you actually think it’s okay that they had a bot make a press release this hamfisted?
You are not “saying it sounds like it is written by AI”, you are affirming it is written by an AI. Big difference.
You affirmation being formated as a question doesn’t change anything, it is a Loaded Question, which tends to be frowned upon.Babe I have two eyes, two ears, and a heart that yearns for honesty and knowledge. I know people can sound robotic too, and there are corporate scripts, and autism is a factor, but good lord. If there was an alien wearing human-esque skin suit standing in front of you I don’t think you’d be able to tell it from an actual person and that’s just sad.
Depending on the definition of “a person”, an alien could be one. What would be your definition of a person ?
I was just pointing out your earlier answer is a loaded question, by definition.
Sure they could be a person. I think dolphins and elephants are people too. You are arguing in bad faith. You can’t tell if a human or AI wrote a press statement and that makes me sad.
Because people will call anything AI slop now, without any evidence. This doesn’t look AI generated to me. This is the same as something we’d have seen a decade ago. There’s even a weird space at the start of a paragraph, which makes me think human, not AI.
Why do you think this is AI? What indications are there for that, other than the corpo-speak, which has been normal for a long time before AI even, hence the name.
As I mentioned more in detail in other post, Proton is not the pro-MAGA many had misinterpreted. It is just sloppy at the marketing campaign and its leader makes statements that can easily misunderstood too.
That said, Proton has decided to aim for the masses, which has proven to be a winning business formula here. However, in that quest, it’s natural that concerns from top-tier privacy users (Linux users, those wanting non-Google push notifications, too-many-eggs-in-a-basket, etc.) get relegated in favor of the bulk of their primary target customers, the regular Joe who simply wants to move away from email and web traffic scraping. We should all applaud that decision, but we also recognize the limitations and big risks of having a single company holding some 80% of this privacy market, both for us and even for Proton. It would be better to foster a healthy, diverse, and more equitable privacy ecosystem.
The fact you think being pro-MAGA is the only evil we should be concerned about is telling.
No idea why the downvotes are hitting this so hard.
Maybe because it’s a bit like if someone said “I got the test results, I don’t have cancer”, and that dude replied with “the fact that you think cancer is the only danger you should be concerned about is telling”.
Sure, it’s technically correct, but it’s obnoxious and, without any further context, just seems to be off-topic.
Lefty lemmy
Non ml lemures. Liberals and reactionaries.
I love that the comment explaining it already existed when you wrote this. No, it couldn’t be that you were out of line! It had to just be the liberals!
As a leftist, maybe shut the fuck up sometimes. Maybe you aren’t always the smartest person in the room, and complaining about stuff that isn’t even relevant is, at best, annoying, if not actively harmful because people will ignore it when it is relevant.
As a leftist,
This expression is so liberal. Your identity, or mine, doesn’t mean much. And liberals and the true left have different views on leftism. The imperialist Bernie Sanders is from the phony left.
As for the post, “They hate Jesus because he told them the truth”. As an atheist.
Lol.
An LLM wrote this
Honestly…good response. Own up to their error instead of ducking. Explain how it happened, and accept the responsibility of making sure it doesn’t happen again. Well written with a good message.
“you’re right to raise this” really triggers my AI detection Spidey senses. Sounds like Claude, specifically.
“and thats on us”
AI slop from top to bottom
I don’t know how far we can trust that tool, but originality.ai concludes that this has been written by a human.
I don’t believe that it was written by a human, but regardless, it’s a shitty way to speak
Seems like normal Corp-speak in response to a question. I don’t know what they’re responding to though, because this post only has their reply. Maybe it’s AI, but it’s also perfectly standard corpo language, which is why the AI uses it.
There’s an extra space at the start of a paragraph, which an LLM wouldn’t do. That makes me think human.
I don’t know what they’re responding to though, because this post only has their reply.
they platformed a well known french fascist.
I know that. This is a reply to a specific statement or post or something that someone made. It says it’s a stickies comment in the picture.
Edit: Your comment is wrong though. They didn’t platform a fascist. That means the fascist used Proton’s platform. Instead Proton purchased space in the Fascist’s platform. The fascist platformed Proton, but Proton paid them. Still bad. Just a correction.
you’re working from a different definition of “platform.” I’m using the modern sense: giving someone a stage or amplifying their voice, not just hosting them on your own service.
Yeah, that’s the same way I’m using it. I have no idea how paying for an ad in one of their videos is amplifying their voice. It’s amplifying Proton’s, but not this Fascist’s… well, until the controversy at least
Again, still bad. No one should be giving Fascists money. It’s using their platform to spread Proton though, not the other way around.
They seem to know that the market for privacy is more than people who want just want their private data safe. There are also people that use these services for controversial and or illegal shit. So they use these chuds and reach those spaces.
It’s the swiss business model. A lot of controversial and corrupted people, politicians hide their money in privacy oriented banks offshore. They make profits no matter where the money comes from.
A little bad press after the stuff is out doesn’t really matter all that much if that drives more profits. The backlash might even get them more exposure.
They apologize and say they’ll never do it again and everyone moves on.
Written by Claude … “You are right to raise this”… Like chatgpt dashing
Ah, yes, reaffirming that someone raising an issue is correct to have done so is the telltale sign of an LLM. Couldn’t just be basic professional writing etiquette that LLMs were trained forwards and backwards on; it has to have been written by an LLM.
You don’t actually write formally very much, do you?
“You are right to raise this and we want to address this directly”
Isnt that how Claude Sonnet or Opus writes?
Stop this “I suspect it was made with AI” witch hunt, please, it’s completely fruitless
I think they’ve just been trained on corporate speak
“You’re right to raise this”
“…and that’s on us”
Did AI write the whole thing?
You’re right to raise this is so weird. It’s a response to one comment, not for broad communication.
Take notes, GOG.
Wtf… What did gog do??
I can TASTE the prompt from this image
The Proton founder is Pro MAGA that should be the end of it for most of you. I’m never going to leave Njalla for my VPN needs
While I agree that the response is heavily AI generated, I have to disagree that he’s pro-Maga. He reached out to both democrats and republicans to talk about the importance of privacy and the democrats turned him down (or entirely ignored him) while the republicans met with him.
He then went on Xitter to shame the Dems and said that the Republicans seemed to be the party caring about privacy.
He’s definitely a dumbass for trying to play it that way, but he did not come out in support of Maga.
unfortunately, a lot of us need more than vpn and proton has a full suite.
He was not pro maga just because he could gain an audience with GOP members but not dems on a lobbying trip. There has never been a single shred of evidence showing he is pro maga, and at this point I’m just going to assume it’s a smear campaign against a Google competitor.
Change my mind. I dare anyone to show the proof.
How does that make sense? Google is also maga. Hell, YouTube is one of the biggest rabbit holes for extremism in general. They could tune their algorithms for anything they wanted - it’s pretty clear.
For Proton we’ll it’s easy to say there is no evidence after dismissing all of it. How maga of you.
I also have yet to see any evidences of Andy Yen being a Maga supporter.
Would you care ro point us to the evidence you claim is being dismissed?
How does that make sense? Google is also maga.
that’s not how most people think about google, and so it could be used (even by google) to smear competitors with being pro-maga. it matters more for the users of the competitor than it does for the users of google.
I feel like this is a good statement. The one that should have been written immediately after outrage began, and ideally before removing dozens if not hundreds of posts and comments covering this topic.
Some people say it stinks of AI. I don’t know. Maybe? PR messages have always been like this, and they seem to be one of the types that chatbots got most of their writing patterns from.
Some people definitely overreacted. Others completely missed the point. Proton is far from a perfect company, and a case in favour of boycotting them could be made. But not because they accidentally sponsored one video of a far-right youtuber.
They’re just not as private and secure as they pretend to be or to want to be. Pretty much all alternatives are leagues above. There appears to be no apparent reason why they’re lagging behind. I suppose that’s where the CIA honeypot allegations may come from.
In any case, if you really care about privacy and security - you probably aren’t a Proton user, let alone customer. And if you are - I highly recommend trying alternatives that don’t have a long history of working with law enforcement.
The one that should have been written immediately after outrage began, and ideally before removing dozens if not hundreds of posts and comments covering this topic.
For what it’s worth - apparently they said they’re crafting a response fairly early, kept one of the original threads and removed the rest as duplicates.
But I don’t know if that’s really the case.
This response is unfeeling and reactive Claude slop. Proton doesn’t care. They’re working to avoid being in trouble.
What would have been the right response in your opinion?
Probably not starting the statement with “you’re right to raise this. Here’s why”
Have a real human type out the apology
Edit:
You’re right to call this out, and I want to address it directly and provide important context on how this happened.
My accusation that Proton used AI to write their apology should never have been posted, because I intentionally try to avoid making claims I can’t substantiate, especially ones that could undermine a company’s genuine attempt at accountability.
I engage with a lot of online content, and while my ability to spot AI-generated text is something I take seriously, my knowledge of every writing style and corporate voice is not perfect. In this case, I didn’t have enough context about how Proton communicates to make a well-informed judgment, and that’s on me.
I also want to be straight about what an accusation like this is and isn’t. Pointing out polished writing is an observation, not evidence. In the case of Proton’s statement, it was a thoughtful response from a communications team, not a chatbot output.
But that distinction doesn’t excuse what I said. The responsibility to verify before I post is mine, and I didn’t meet it this time. I’m now reviewing how I evaluate content before making public claims to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
If you see me do something like this again, call it out. I rely on that feedback.
PR team writing excuses and AI is the same fucking picture.
You can call everything AI if you want to.
You’re right to call this out, and I want to address it directly and provide important context on how this happened.
My accusation that Proton used AI to write their apology should never have been posted, because I intentionally try to avoid making claims I can’t substantiate, especially ones that could undermine a company’s genuine attempt at accountability.
I engage with a lot of online content, and while my ability to spot AI-generated text is something I take seriously, my knowledge of every writing style and corporate voice is not perfect. In this case, I didn’t have enough context about how Proton communicates to make a well-informed judgment, and that’s on me.
I also want to be straight about what an accusation like this is and isn’t. Pointing out polished writing is an observation, not evidence. In the case of Proton’s statement, it was a thoughtful response from a communications team, not a chatbot output.
But that distinction doesn’t excuse what I said. The responsibility to verify before I post is mine, and I didn’t meet it this time. I’m now reviewing how I evaluate content before making public claims to ensure this doesn’t happen again.
If you see me do something like this again, call it out. I rely on that feedback.
You’re not making a point.
In fact I did, because I wrote that with AI 😂
Literally everyone understood that.
for once, directly fucking saying they will drop the fascists they are paying for and never doing it again.
shouldn’t be that hard, but with these it always has to be.
That’s exactly what they said in this response
No, there is not an antifascist position on their statement. Only a ultracentrist position based on the reaction of their user base/market.
I think it’s smart as a privacy focused initiative to be more neutral than not. Especially as they cater to the masses that may not have as defined an opinion.
I strongly dissagree. Cannot be neutrality with fascism.
Oh i agree. Neutrality doesn’t mean embracing nor endorsing fascism, nor any other extreme.
But humans being humans will always selectively interpret any public facing message to fit their narrative as many have already done here: “Because they aren’t outright condemning or fighting the enemy, they must be working with them! Therefore, they are not friends.”
/U/encryptkeeper has said it better.
Moving the goalposts. You said they need to drop the fascist from their sponsorship and they did. They also committed to not doing it in the future. They did exactly what you said.
On top of that, companies are not your friends and they don’t need political positions. Not supporting fascists is perfectly adequate.
No, I didnt’t say that. I’ve said:
No, there is not an antifascist position on their statement. Only a ultracentrist position based on the reaction of their user base/market.
See the original paragraph:
I understand that they would have removed also the sponsorship of a feminist, vegan or antiracist that created discontent in their use base (by being feminist, vegan or antiracist).
They have also said that if the user base finds their sponsorship or seeming alignment with any other divisive agenda, they welcome feedback.
I’m not following their PR engagement, but if anyone feels strongly about them aligning with furbys, they are welcome to feedback.
I think you’re extremely confused as to what Proton is and the service they offer.
I also think it’s because you’re falling (or have fallen) into the tribalist view of “if you’re not with us, you’re against us, and if you’re against them, you’re with us”.
Proton is a-political, pro-agenda. Their agenda is “net neutrality, privacy, security”. They don’t care who makes that happen, and will support anyone who fights for these things.
They won’t take an antifascist position because that would put them on the political spectrum.
I also understand that - to you - not making that statement already puts them on the political spectrum, in the opposing camp, but that’s, again, due to the tribalist views.
They’ve praised left-wingers and right-wingers, they’ve criticised Democrats and Republicans - as long as anyone pushes for their agenda, they will praise them, as long as someone threatens their agenda, they will criticise them. That’s all there is to it.
You stopped reading after the first paragraph, didn’t you?
I’m pretty sure that’s what they said no? Are you upset that they didn’t use more emotional language?
they’ve directly addressed democrats before and directly condemning fascism would have been reassuring, if that’s what you mean by ‘emotional’.
none of that “dividing our community” bullshit. this text just makes them sound disappointed they got caught.
I completely disagree. I think you’re massively overreacting.
“You were right to raise this” and “we want to be straight about this” smacks of AI
“And thats on us”
At least they removed all the em dashes
Why does everyone seem to regard the em dash as an instant LLM-indicator? Many real people—me included—use them regularly. Yes, LLMs use them—perhaps too much—but many so-called “AI-tells” come from training data—real text written by real people.
Why the hell would you type a em dash.
Why the hell would you use punctuation?
You can just use a dash - a human “mistake” that basically doesn’t matter.
90% of users don’t even know how to make an em dash — hence, llm indicator.
You answered yourself, LLMs use them too much.
That’s why I’m leaving proton and it’s community. Lots of drama and political shit that I don’t want to know, not to mention the whole thing where proton from just an email provider, now sells VPN and other services l.
