10·
18 hours agoI think that what I was talking about is exactly why they say what they say, for people that want to have more privacy/antonymy it’s there to tell them that the system itself is inherently limited so they can’t expect to be completely safe and the provider can do whatever they want or need to do by law (and here it seems from what they say, if it is 100% true, that they have been trying not to comply for the users’ sake) when you rely on their service.
About the non-refundability, it’s true, though it’s not any more suspicious than the service in itself trying what they can to keep the users’ anonymity, so it is at least coherent, I guess it’s really up to how much you trust them there, you know what you’re getting into after all
I’m not ok with those things obviously, but I don’t know enough about them to say what I think is all, I’m just talking about the “technical” aspect and that at a base level I think that the effort to make a more anonymous service is respectable, though I would have never used a service like this personally. Of course that also implies that anything passing through it should be harder to track and moderate, for good and bad