Search the Community

First they came for the terrorists, then they came for the child molesters, then they came for the copyright avoiders, then they came for the porn fans, then ... "As part of its mission creep, the government is also pushing for the BBFC regulator to have the power to tell ISPs to block content that isn't pornographic. It states: The steps that may be specified or arrangements that may be put in place under subsection (2) © include steps or arrangements that will or may also have the effect of preventing persons in the United Kingdom from being able to access material other than the offending material using the service provided by the Internet service provider." http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/11/isps-block-porn-sites-age-verification-digital-economy-bill/ "And the bill already makes it clear that the government wants to go after "infringing sites" by choking their access to payment providers such as Visa and PayPal, ..." Not in the Brit livestock, but what China calls "internet sovereignty" is spreading. So prudent to be paid up for another year just in case payment monitoring or blocking of VPNs is added to the powers that be.

Put differently, Kepler, a poll by the American polling company Gallup, in 2014, found that the US was considered the biggest threat to world peace. Well before Trump or HIllary fighting for the presidency. Not Russia, not China, not all the "regimes" you like to hit on. It's a poll that most Americans may not have heard about, as it wasn't really carried by US media, naturally. This was a survey of 65 countries. But according to you, none of this will matter, because the US is simply fighting for various "rights", while all the others are just abusing human rights. So are you going to tell me that the rest of the world is just plain wrong hmm? Because I can agree that Russia shouldn't have annexed Crimea for instance. But how is it any different to the US virtually annexing Iraq, Afghanistan and all the others? Try and for once focus on what the US has done please, instead of just going back to hitting on the others again and talking about human rights. Just for a change.

Well guys, I would like if you both watched your tone a bit, as there's no reason to be rude to one another . @Kepler Thanks for a long post, I like those. I think your opinion is contradictory. 1) You claim I excuse repressive regimes and yet you routinely excuse the US? I don't excuse them. I acknowledge the fact that they do bad things. Instead, what I'm doing is a response to what you're doing (funny enough), because what you do, is never look at why they do what they do. Instead, you often simply jump to the conclusion that they're basically just evil/bad, as if this were a Harry Potter movie and that that's why. Which in turn means that you don't view reality at all. 2) I never said I hated the US. But as with previously, you seem to think that the equation goes like this: critique = hatred. If so, then I would, by your definition, also be a hater of all things Russian and Chinese. I'm not. Again, it's just that your points of view lack balance. You constantly repeat (respectfully speaking) the same things regarding various human rights. Yet you refuse to acknowledge the US role in the subversion of those very same rights. It's strange to see. It's like when the BBC, CNN or the Guardian or the New York Times report that Trump will undermine human rights and yet they don't take a deeper and closer look at the human rights violations already committed under Obama. It's self-defeating. Likewise, you seem to be unwilling to acknowledge what the US has done in the world and whether or not its actions could have at least partly helped provoke circumstances around the world, to evolve into how they are now. I'm not saying it's 100% the US fault, no. I'm asking you if you can acknowledge that the US has any fault at all - on the same level as these "regimes" that you keep critiquing. Because if you can't, then there's nothing more to talk about really, as you will just keep going from "Oh no, look at the effects of Trump" to "Yuck, look at those evil disgusting regimes like Russia being evil again" and back again. Which is tedious and doesn't come close to a realistic appraisal of events at all. I did not say Russia was justified in the actions it took surrounding Crimea. I said that Russia, like any state, doesn't just *do* things at random. But that it has reasons and motivations for doing things. Reasons and motivations which you completely ignore, by instead preferring to simplistically say that Russia is simply a "regime" and that's that. As I've also said, I support the various rights you mentioned and keep mentioning. I just, perhaps unlike you, don't make them into my entire argument. I agree that the Republican party is pretty much a dark stain on humanity, due to all the troubles they cause. But I also think the Democrats aren't really that much better - sure they "officially" support women's rights, but that's only for women in the US. What about Iraqi women? Afghan women? Syrian women? They're bombing those. Or what about when the US helped topple a Democratically elected Iranian leader, leading to leaders like the Shar later on? They don't care about those either. So, as I'm saying, you refuse to look critically at the US. Not looking critically at your own country, is just as much the reason why the US is in dire straits now, as it is that Trump was elected. Because it's people like yourself, respectfully, which enable bad actions that the US government commits. But if you think the US pretty much can't do anything wrong, then you'll never care, even when it does. You'll simply resort to blaming: The government. Some leader of state, say Obama or Putin. Some repressive regime and/or terrorist group.But never yourself and the US as a whole. In a previous post, I took the trouble to source some links, to show you that the US does plenty evil in the world, that has nothing to do with fighting Communists, Terrorists or whatever else, but simply furthering its own strategic goals, with the lives of innocents and their rights, as payment. What did you do? You ignored that post almost entirely. You didn't even acknowledge my critique of the US at all. I can critique the US/China/Saudi Arabia and so on. But can you critique the US? I don't think so. Instead, you ask for the US to be cut some slack, which is madness (for a lack of a better word). Because if the US, considering everything it has done, should be cut some slack, then you should also cut Russia/China/Iran/North Korea/Saudi Arabia and all the others some slack too. But you don't. What you desperately need, Kepler, is to take a good hard look at the definition of what's called "American Exceptionalism". Article excerpt that should highlight this notion to you quite clearly:

That was a good read, thank you. It brought up many of the points I brought against Kepler as well - the notion that it's excellent to have ideals such as his, but that it should be tempered with: Paying attention to practical matters and reality on the ground. Example: Do poor, uneducated white men have legitimate gripes with the system and thus a good reason to vote Trump? An ability to view not just one side of an issue or opinion, but to evaluate both, in an attempt to arrive at as truthful a perception of reality as possible. Example: Why does China act how it acts, in the SCS? Are drone strikes always good, even if said to be brought against terrorists?If those two could be accomplished, then it makes for a good combination of having sound values such as being against racism and various kinds of bigotry, but without being blinded by those same values, in a way that makes one open to being manipulated or otherwise unable to see things for what they are or aren't.

One aspect of it was it being marketed as a win for the USA over China in some zero sum game narrative. But in member states, US Big Pharma would extend patents and force up prices, killing relatives slowly. US Big Tobacco would claim billions in damages for lost profits from governments for anti-smoking regulations. Genetically modified plants and animals would disrupt and destroy native ecosystems and farming practices, but "barriers to trade" cannot exist. Parents of school kids would be extorted or sued by agents of US lawyers for infringing copyright on games and music. Everywhere, from government cabinets to peasant huts, growing hatred of the Yankee Imperialists ... Typical example of the richest 1% and big corporations gorging themselves against the national interests and 99% of Americans.

I can see why you would like to be biased like so and I can respect that. But I don't think you should be decidedly "proud" of it, seeing as it's exactly those kinds of bias which lead to misunderstanding and a clouding of judgement. Judgement being pretty important, if you're at all interested in approaching any sort of truthful view towards reality. After all, isn't that one of the major reasons the Democrats lost? They assumed that as long as they kept talking about women's, LGBTQ, black and minorities rights, everything would be okay, because "who wouldn't support X, Y, Z principles like these?" They even went as far as assuming that because Hillary was a white woman and supported women's rights, white women in the US would also automatically support for her. They held onto this belief in a sort of "duhhh" no-brainer way. Yet apparently some 50% of white women voted for Trump. So this pride you have, is the same sort of pride that blinded people similar to you to reality: that you can't predict what people will vote on, just based on their demographics and your principles and that while those principles are important, they probably take a back seat anyhow, compared to the prospect of losing one's job. So as the saying goes "Pride goeth before a fall". Fall the Democrats did. Also, China for one isn't totalitarian. Your view is wrong - again, respectfully . It's authoritarian and you shouldn't mix these up. North Korea is what you'd call totalitarian, as the NK government has complete control over everything apparently. The Chinese does not. Chinese people are free to talk about whatever they want; especially in private. The Chinese government has created economic zones that enjoy special freedoms; such as Shanghai. Thus they're not controlled by the government. They're called Free Trade Zones. It's also possible for Chinese professors at universities to discuss various otherwise taboo social issues. Not to mention Chinese people can travel whenever they want, quit their jobs whenever they want, marry who they want and so forth. Your aforementioned bias comes back to bite you here, as I alluded to previously. You even go so far as to say that everyone living in China and Russia are unfortunate. Thus what started as an innocent bias, has then grown into a full-on misconception and that is dangerous in itself. But it's even more dangerous when politicians like HC give force to such biases, because you'll thus be more likely to believe in her. Ultimately, this could then lead to you feeling a war is justified, if one broke out. Because you'd think "well, China IS evil, so it makes sense we're fighting them". So I urge you to re-asses. I think Democracy is fine. But it has to be *real* and not fake. I like to use Switzerland as an example. They have a pretty sweet system of Direct Democracy. They even have guns. Yet without the murder rates of the US. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't assume Democracy, in any form, is automatically better than other forms of governance, such as the Chinese form. I doubt Democracy would've been suitable for China for instance, because when your country lay in virtual ruins, as China did in 1978, it would be quite problematic for government (and thus plans) to change every 4 or 8 years, like in the US. Instead, China enjoys a massive advantage: it can plan decades ahead and follow that plan stringently. If those plans are prudent and smart, the country will rapidly improve. Which is exactly what it has done. Also, I don't think China calls itself Communist. It's just they haven't changed the name of the Communist Party haha. I think the hypocrisy, with all due respect of course, is palpable. You actively "worry" about a militarily strong China and how it'll "seize the territory" of its neighbors, when that's exactly what the US has been doing for decades: Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya and slices of many countries around the world, in the form of military bases. Yet as previously stated, China hasn't been in a war for 30 years and yet, for some reason, you automatically think you know what the Chinese will do - presumably just because they're not Democratic. You say the Chinese will just kill anyone disagrees - that may be so. Yet that's also exactly what the US government has been doing abroad; didn't you notice the drone campaigns? I didn't mean to assign you to any camp. I meant to make a comparison of how it's possible, on both sides of the Atlantic, to assume that people who vote a certain way (such as Leave), are also automatically a certain kind of person (racist, bigot, etc.). You also conveniently ignored my last paragraph with the links to US crimes. Maybe you couldn't be bothered to say anything about it or maybe it left you speechless, I don't know. But I can't help but feel that you're really representing the Democrats very well: ignoring the real issues, in favor of talking about high-minded ideals such as Democracy and Women's rights. Which, while definitely important, cannot make up 90% of the argument, by neglecting practical realities . I think this is very important actually. Since if you think about it, what reasons does the US government traditionally use to justify war? "Freedom", "Democracy", "Human-rights". Then people who are less intelligent and aware than yourself, instantly do a volte-face from being against war and conflict to being fine with them. Because hey, it's for "freedom" and "women's rights" in those Middle-Eastern dictatorships, right? Yet the practical reality is completely ignored and brushed aside, because it's presumed that these "higher ideals" justify the means; even when they don't. It's the sort of mindset that makes people think that the destruction of civil society, like in Iraq, is acceptable, because now the women are "free" from the male patriarchy and state oppression. Even when it really just means starvation and even more severe kinds of abuse, such as those by all the crazies like ISIS or the Taliban now being let loose. So I urge you to consider both the practical realities and realities that the other side face too; whilst not forgetting your cherished beliefs in freedom, democracy and so on, of course. Just don't be fooled .

It sounds like you're saying the Chinese government could block Air, but thinks it shouldn't. Does STAFF think its technically possible for China to block Air?

Air works from within China. But it's slow. The Chinese government knows it shouldn't crack down on all outside communication, as many citizens and companies rely on access for things like business. Besides, it can be a tricky business given the scale of the operation I think . If they just block all forms of encryption, the internet breaks as well lol. Sent to you from me with datalove

Speaking of China, I was considering extended travel there. It's one of the reasons I signed-up to AirVPN, because Air had the rare capacity to circumvent the Great Firewall. Does anyone know if Air is still able to do that, and, technically, why can't the Chinese prevent Air from accessing the free internet from inside China?

Yes, I am proud to be "biased" in favor of democracy and "biased" against totalitarian regimes like those in Russia and China (and by the way hating totalitarian regimes is not the equivalent of hating the unfortunate people that have to live under them...quite the opposite). Apparently you think those regimes are nice alternatives. If I have that wrong, LZ1, please tell me what form of government you're biased in favor of. Regarding Brexit you've narrow-mindedly pre-assigned me to the anti-Brexit camp. In fact I was in favor of it. As for my notion of Democracy, it involves actually having a democracy. China is absolutely captialist, though they continue the double-speak hypocrisy of calling themselves a Communist state...laughable if it weren't so pathetically dishonest and transparent. Oh yes, they are doing very well for themselves on the backs of their poor peasants. Soon they will be well enough off to afford a military big enough to seize the territory of their less powerful neighbors (excepting Tibet whose territory they already seized). China is an intolerant severely oppressive single-party state that suppresses, jails, or kills anyone that publicly opposes it's leadership clique. That combination is the very definition of fascism. If you lived in China we wouldn't be having this conversation because you wouldn't be allowed to access foreign sites where people can openly criticize oppressive regimes.

Thank you for the clarification. They're usually always nice ^^. Don't you think you're exaggerating just a little bit, regarding a Democratic future being in jeopardy? Trump was elected on democratic grounds - or as democratic as it is in the us. I think you're biased towards Democracy and living on the assumption that Democracy is automatically the best or most desirable form of government. This is a big mistake in my view, but it's not unexpected. It's a little funny really, in that it seems that people who hold views similar to yours (respectfully), desire open-mindedness (no sexism, bigotry, racism, anti-abortion, etc.), yet instantly turn away anyone with a different mindset or approach. Say someone votes for Trump (or even that Brexit thing), it seems there's a tendency to reduce them to being racists and bigots (of course, some are). Similarly, those who don't subscribe to your notion of Democracy, are repressive fascist regimes. I wonder if you think this is wrong or not. Because the fact remains that both Russia and China have been doing pretty well for themselves. Especially China, in virtually all metrics besides internet-freedom and pollution(although this is improving). Yet you apparently don't care about this, as long as they're not Democratic. I think that's strange, respectfully. Because if you go to China, you may find that China is arguably more Capitalist and free in many ways, compared to the US. The Great Firewall does have some positive effects though: Since there's often a greater convenience in not bypassing the wall, Chinese consumers will often favor local companies. Which in turn means more jobs, as these companies then grow. This can then positively impact the economy and then later, the rest of the world, as giants like Alibaba and Tencent expand. Likewise, more Chinese people learn how to use VPNs (hehe). But in terms of being in an opinion bubble, how is that much different from being on Facebook or Google? The Chinese people I've met, have no illusions about their government. I think it's very easy to compare the us with China and/or Russia. I think you're sadly very very mistaken about the us. Again, respectfully speaking . Just because the us may be Democratic, it doesn't mean it's not capable of being an evil or bad country - yes, evil "on par" with whatever evil you can ascribe to China/Russia. There's plenty evidence that shows that the US actually hates any form of "Democracy"; especially outside its own borders. So perhaps you're right that the US can't be compared to China/Russia, except that the equation is reversed. You may think China is being aggressive with its territorial grabs in Asia, but did you consider why China is doing what it's doing? I think it would be too simplistic to resort to saying something along the lines of "well, because it's a fascist dictatorship". Even if it were a fascist dictatorship, that wouldn't help your Democracy argument, seeing as said dictatorship is currently outpacing the US very quickly in a number of ways. Perhaps especially with Trump at the helm now. Us Democracy is also quite questionable in many ways after all: Extremely low voter turn out, all manner of electoral quirks as each state votes differently, counts differently, has different rules and different methodologies. Through to things such as the Electoral College and the notion that a candidate can lose a vote, like HIllary did, despite getting most votes, to campaigns being funded through SuperPACS by rich companies and the list goes on. Not to mention that while there's technically multiple parties in play, in practice there's only 2 - which speaks to the illusion of choice that you also alluded to. To speak nothing of how us politics is dominated and how americans continually don't get what they want. So to call it a Democracy may in fact be a little insulting in the eyes of those countries whom arguably may have more robust systems . I can't see how you can justify calling China's "slave labor" system out, when it has clearly proven to have worked very well for the country and is thus increasingly being rolled back now; hence why China isn't the cheapest place to manufacture in anymore, Chinese tourists are some of the biggest spenders and the Chinese economy is the 2nd biggest in the world (number 1, if you go by PPP). Thus it's estimated around 600 million people have been taken out of extreme poverty. That's double the us population. It seems like you're not willing to accept that things cannot be *ideal* from the start. That you can't have humane working conditions instantly for example. They made sacrifices and it worked. It's the same story in the West - just look at coal miners for example. As for Russia, you should keep in mind which country often creates the problem to begin with. During days past, it was promised that the West wouldn't "take one step to the East" in the form of NATO. Yet what happened? Yep, steps right towards Russia. Hopefully you can also appreciate the Russian security point of view. I think HC would've exacerbated this situation tremendously. I can agree to jail for GW and co though . But since HC has so much free time now, perhaps we shouldn't forget our manners: Ladies first!

P.S. The U.S.not only helped it's allies rebuild, it helped it's former enemies, Germany, Austria and Italy rebuild. I'm not excusing any U.S. crimes. I think G.W. Bush, for instance, should be in jail along with a couple of former Presidents (Johnson and Nixon if they were still alive). China hasn't been in any wars because they've been busy building their economy on the backs of domestic slave labor. But now they're certainly doing some very loud saber rattling and claiming other country's territory. And let's see, Russia hasn't been in wars in, ummm, oh ya, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Syria? It hasn't seized the territory of some neighboring state? Ummm, oh ya, the Ukraine.

@LZ1, as I read through your post, I think we agree on a lot of points. Just to clarify again, I'm no fan of HC nor of much that the U.S. has done. But I still believe the U.S. offers the only chance to sustain democracy into the future (and that may have just evaporated with Trump's election). You can't possibly think that Russia, which is an undisputed fascist dictatorship, offers a better chance for a democratic future than the U.S. (a majority of U.S. citizens voted against Trump...64% of Russians voted for Putin in a five way race with the next highest candidate receiving a quarter of that). And China? My god, an even more extreme fascist dictatorship replete with the trappings of a Great Firewall to cut off its citizens from any point of view other than the government's, and without even sham alternative parties to maintain the pretense of choice. The equivalence of evil you're trying to create between the U.S. on the one hand and Russia/China on the other is literally like comparing a molehill to a mountain. The difference in degree makes them different beasts. Unlike Russia or China, the U.S. has a strong history and tradition of democracy. People in the U.S. are trying to hang onto that. If it fails there it will fail everywhere and it certainly won't be revived from Russia or China.

@emaus78 Your English is fine man, no problems . @Kepler Even with a runaway technical breakthrough, nothing will change as long as you have a system that has vested interests against such change. For instance, there's nuclear technology based on a resource known as Thorium(LFTR - Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactor) which has been lying around for 50 years. Thorium powered nuclear reactors are epic because: Passive safety. Due to the design, if something goes wrong, even if it's a power cut, the reactor will set itself into a safe configuration. Automatically. No humans needed. There's no high pressure. Thus a reactor meltdown is physically impossible. There's only high heat, which is fine in itself. Thorium can't be used in nuclear weapons, due to its chemistry. Thus the Iran nuclear deal wouldn't be a problem with a thorium reactor for instance. Thorium is literally everywhere on Earth and super plentiful. Unlike uranium or plutonium, which are precious. Pound for pound, thorium provides a massive amount of energy. Truly massive. You wouldn't need many reactors, to power the entire world. Due to there being no risk of a meltdown, you can build smaller reactor buildings. Which means it's faster and cheaper too. No 10 year lead times. Thorium reactors (called LFTR really, pronounced Lifter), can use the nuclear waste of *other* current-day reactors. So nuclear waste also won't be an issue. You never need to take out the Thorium from the core, so there's never any waste material and thus no nuclear exposure to anyone or anything.Yet despite all that, LFTR reactors are nowhere to be seen. China is supposedly building some now, but as you can see, when there's no political will, nothing happens. Nuclear energy also enjoys a pretty tainted image as well. I linked to the documentary - it's quite excellent IMO . It's basically nuclear power, without all the known drawbacks. So I frankly disagree with technical breakthroughs being necessary. As long as you have systems which favor things like privatization and/or de-regulation as in the neoliberal order, there's little incentive for this sort of thing. That's where I think Hillary wouldn't have made a difference . I also can't cut the us slack. I can cut individuals some slack, but not countries. Your story is only half of it or barely even. It points to an extremely rosey point of view. Just because the us did the bare minimum to help out its allies after WW2, doesn't mean it's excused for all the deliberate crimes it then went on to commit throughout the world; of which I think most people are ignorant of, despite the fact we live with the consequences of them today . I'm sure you wouldn't be so comfortable with being told you're living under a Chinese "military umbrella" - yet you're perfectly fine with saying it about the us. Which is unjustified. China for instance, hasn't been in a war for around 20-30 years now. While the us has been in near-continual war for the same period. Likewise Russia hasn't been the one to instigate most of wars in the Middle-East and only has around 2 military bases abroad, versus the several hundred of the us. Yet you still argue those countries are bad or worse and that Hillary would be best? I think that's very questionable . I honestly can't see how you would reason that China or Russia would be worse than the us. In a Cyber context, I think China is worse due to the censorship of its internet and such, but geo-politically? That's where a lot of the appeal lies with Donald Trump. Yes he's a bigot and all that. But the mere chance of doing things a different way, is attractive. Just look at what he has said about Russia and Putin. I think it's refreshing that he's willing to work with Putin, instead of the alternative: more hatred towards Russia, for no good reason really. In the end, while I agree with your view of Trump, it just doesn't work to respond with "that's racist! " or its equivalent, whenever people have real issues: unemployment, faltering economies, increasing levels of wealth inequality and so on. All compounded by all these "free trade" deals, which aren't about trade, but about everything except trade. Hillary would've continued this .

LZ1, I think you need to cut the U.S. a little slack. I don't think you can name any powerful country in history that didn't push weaker countries around for it's own benefit. That's a human fault, not just a U.S. fault. Yes, the U.S. certainly did that and I hate it. But at the same time it did pay to rebuild Europe after WW2 and protected the non-communist world from the USSR and China. Europe, Japan and most of the world still lives under the protection of the U.S. military umbrella. Those who want to see the U.S. fall should be careful what they wish for. Finding themselves under Russia's or China's thumb would be drastically worse. Re: climate change. All the talk is pointless now. Frankly it's too little too late. Short of a dramatic technical breakthrough (like fusion) very soon, runaway global warming is the future. World carbon emission will continue to rise because of China, India, South America and more generally human's inability to limit their breeding (global population is now projected to NOT level off at 12 billion, but continue to grow). We've probably already passed the global warming tipping point and it would take a massive cheap clean energy expenditure (the technology for which we don't have) to try to undo it. The latest projections based on the latest data from Antarctica show a 6ft sea level rise by the end of the century. Trillions will be spent in an ultimately futile attempt to buy more time for the world's major coastal cities. I agree more should be done to put in place the latest generation of fission plants which are passively cooled and fail safely and without human intervention when they fail. Still that falls into the too little too late bucket.

The consistency thing was more of a joke though, haha. Because as we know, he's very inconsistent. But while I agree with your description of him, I don't see how that would make him any worse than Hillary would've been, in terms of bullying/terrorising the rest of the world. Because sadly, fact is the us has been doing just that, ever since WW2 ended . It's just either swept under the rug or made to sound justifiable. Due to DTs inconsistency, I also don't think it's worth being afraid of him not working out differences with non-whites, because even he, as a Republican, has been quite Democratic in terms of his views, at some points. So his views aren't even iron-clad. As many have said, there may be a distinction to be had between campaign-DT and president-DT behaviour. I also do know that he denies climate change. He once said it was a Chinese plot, concocted to cripple american industry, due to the extra burdens of being environmentally friendly placed on them, haha. So while it's a tragedy he holds such views, at least other nations like China will continue to improve their respective environments. Even if, naturally, it may be slower now perhaps. It should be said Hillary was no angel even in this respect though. She actively supported fracking, which is lame. It's a shame nuclear power isn't supported more. As for rule of law, I still don't think Hillary would be a major change in that regard either. Where was rule of law when Iraq was invaded illegally for instance? Or millions spied upon? Sure he represents greed, but yet again, how is that any different from Hillary, who was found to receive speaker fees from Goldman Sachs and others? I think it all just comes down to whether you want your vices hidden or thrown in your face. If hidden, then Hillary is the way to go. If thrown in your face, then DT.

Thank you for your reply. IThis ATA works with OpenVPN in client mode. In GUI of this ATA under OpenVPN section it has two options i.e. Enable VPN and Import VPN configuration. Do you think this device is working with tls auth key? Sorry I have no clue on this, device will arrive in a week from China and I am worried I might take agest to configure it if don't know much about it from now

One may see categories of VPN user at present. Some are "pirates" after streaming or bittorrent or ftp content without drawing problems from ISP or lawyers or police, and often interested in raw speed especially at peak evening time and big data allowances. Some are more concerned with privacy and security for a range of reasons, from dissent with the ever more smothering surveillance state with email and website logging and content retention and scanning and realtime alerting and focussing and ... and ... Others are in political environments such as China or Myanmar or USA (put her in jail, sue them all, buy a better gun, ...) where consequences of personal expression are uncertain. Others have reason to beware commercial or criminal mercenaries/investigators. Some may be doing criminal things, but serious ones can avoid sending out clues and evidence anyway.

I'm still curious if the experimental client would've solved it for you. Did you ever try it? Oh and I'd be careful around that suspicious "zhang888" person, as you never know if he'll suddenly build a wall somewhere and proceed to blame China for this "global warming hoax" it created, on his Twitter account!

Have another joint and see if you can concentrate on what I actually said. I said that if it delivers what it promises the digital world really needs it. And for the record, I have not said anybody should trust it in advance of proving itself. I, personally, have just about convinced myself to buy a small mining contract. There's definitely risk in that and I wouldn't encourage anyone to take a risk without understanding it. But I like the idea of supporting a really promising technology created by some very smart people. And, yes, if it works out, I like the idea of getting a financial payback for taking the risk. But your timing on the tea thing is amazing LOL. I just brewed a pot of marvelous keemun from China....yummmy If the contract works out I'll send you some keemun with the 1 BTC that zhang888 will owe me Cheers.

Everybody surveils. But people only complain about the USA. I guess they expect such from Russia and China? By the way, if you believe some people, Ukraine is likely under heavy USA surveillance as a sort of cold war with Russia.

HK seems quite conflicted between pro and anti Peoples Republic influences, so maybe quite a bit of "espionage" in a general sense, including commercial opportunism etc. As the Russia - US election issues show, domestic political activists and organisations may be of interest. USA often complains about China after commercial/military intellectual property. If I was an American, I would be wary of the government being extra pissed off and paying attention if more exposed to China than say Switzerland. As well as the official government legal etc position in various server hosting nations, there is also the problem of "everyone has their price" amongst individuals in government, corporate management, software developer cubicles and system admin cool rooms and backup cabinets. Corruption is worse in some places than others, Ukraine, Panama, etc come to mind. So it probably depends what you want to keep secure as to who is after it. If you are Joe Nobody emailing a porn star in America, everyone from the FBI to recruitment agencies to Google ad placement would like to know, but the players in HK would not care.

I wouldn't think that Hong Kong would be much safer than China. Their internet privacy laws aren't horrible, they have very limited censorship laws. I don't think Hong Kong has close relations to the US (or anyone from the UKUSA agreement). It's hard to say which country would be the safest... However, If I had to pick just one... Ukraine. There is no signs of monitoring/spying government programs. Other good options would be Switzerland and Sweden.

Quick question, i know there are several country's in Europe that are safer from US surveillance, but considering how Hong Kong is in proximity to China (US enemy) and Edward Snowden considered it safe enough to retreat to, is Hong Kong safer for internet privacy compared to some of its counterparts? If not what are the best country's AirVPN offers to use to get as far away from US monitoring as possible? Note: I know its practically impossible to evade US monitoring, but surely there is one country safer than another.

Maybe this in a year or two. Also Brave Browser in another year. My password manager needs to support it, and I need a good plugin API to switch. I used Opera up until the last update when it started sending Speed Dial data to mainland China and Qihoo completed their takeover of Opera. OperaMini on Android now proxies you to mainland China when you use the speed boost/bandwidth saver/adblocker.. Not a chance in hell! For now, Google-Stripped Chromium is the most pure browsing experience. Woolyss is the best version I have found; http://chromium.woolyss.com/#windows-64-bit-stable-nik