I switched to windscribe last month because the proton CEO starting spewing politcal BS, and I wanted port forwarding that wasn't locked behind a shitty GUI.
As far as I was concerned setup was super easy, the VPN speeds were great, and port forwarding worked really nicely. The whole price for a fixed server and port forward, + unlimited data was a bit much (at $95/year) but for the ease of use and speeds I was getting, I was happy to stick with them.
My setup is a always-on server with a 1gbps connection, where yes, I fucking seed my shit, all of it. I have about 30TB of linux ISOs and counting, and it's rare that my combined upload speed is less than 1MBps, ever.
Which lead me to getting banned from windscribe with no notice or warning in the middle of last week. This lead to me having to spend tracker points to avoid HnR, and i'm also unable to grab any new ISOs until I find a new VPN provider that won't ban me for actually using the service full time.
I did shoot them an email (after talking' with their AI bot first), and they were actually helpful enough. The offered to restore support, so long as I promised to not torrent with them again (which, I honestly did promise not to. I'm not sticking with a VPN service that can't handle me actually using it for what it's advertised for) and they did unban the account. Whole email chain took about three days to get resolved.
My sticking point is that they still have instructions on setting up torrents on their own website, and that they specifically allow for unlimited data (with the plan i paid for) so long as it's just one user. I did not break those rules. After clarifying that in the support email, they still said that I was using too much data (despite the unlimited data advertisement) and that torrenting was not allowed on their service.
TL:DR: Windscribe bans you if you use a lot of data, and support says torrents aren't allowed, despite their website advertising such. Proof in the attached images.
If y'all have any other suggestions for a VPN that allow port forwarding i'd really appreciate it.
I'm not from the US, I think this is how I'm looking at this.
I already said this a couple of times, but seems like I have to repeat it: nobody in the conversation (Yen included) believes Trump did anything "in good faith". I specifically stated that I believe whatever anti-trust policies and actions Trump has made were done explicitly in bad faith, as an attempt to get back at "Big Tech" for being "anti-right-wing".
He didn't "imply otherwise". Not once has he stated that he "believes in the long term mission of the Republican party to fight for the rights of the consumers". He only said that Reps became anti-Big Tech recently and that it's good.
Again: there are no statements of intent, ONLY statement of fact.
I'm sorry, what??
You asked "what were the good things [Reps did]". I gave you examples. You didn't ask "what did the attempts accomplish", did you?
Considering it's the US we're talking about, and how hilariously long some court cases can take, it'd be a miracle to see ANYTHING come out of these cases before 2030 (assuming they're not trashed now that Big Tech is back in bed with Trump, of course).
However, it is an undeniable, objective FACT that these cases are a start, that these examples show anti-Big Tech attitude, and that these are examples of Trump admin's (accidental) fight for the betterment of the life of "the little guy".
Did you forget about the Tik-Tok ban? Again, you asked for examples of actions, not results. Considering how fresh things are (it all started fairly late into his previous term), I don't know why you're expecting many examples of results, that's just being extremely unrealistic.
Well, that's because you still seem to be thinking in a kind of "all or nothing" way. It's either "Trump == Hitler" or "OMG I love Trump" for you - no inbetween. It's either "they completely obliterated Big Tech" or "absolutely nothing accomplished". It's like you don't believe in small steps? I honestly am baffled by your responses so far.
This whole situation is baffling. It's literally:
It's just... weird to me.
Anyway, maybe read THIS comment by Yen which he made just 3 months ago, and THIS post from a day later.. It sheds some more light about his stance on things.
I don't see any malicious intent in there, do you?
I have already read the first link you posted. As I mentioned in my OP for this thread, it is not convincing or logically sound. He literally says "It is not a bad thing that Republicans have moved so far on this issue". Zero critical thought about this.
Keep on acting obtuse. Hitler/Bitler. "You didn’t ask “what did the attempts accomplish”, did you?" Asking for outcomes on anti-trust is the same thing as “they completely obliterated Big Tech”. Small steps? What small steps are you talking about? We both know there are none and if any future action will happen it will be for show only and will never have any real impact.
This sort sleazeball rhetoric is why I don't trust people like Yen and you.
I am done here.
Yeah, absolutely nothing's been done (other than two court cases, one ban, and a bunch of further actions I outlined).
It's a shame that you're so thoroughly brainwashed into this tribal attitude, mate. You seem like a smart person, but somehow, when it comes to this "us vs them" you revert to a mindless fundamentalist no different than a Taliban blowing up statues...
I hope you find it in yourself to take a step back and look at things from a wider perspective, to see that you can applaud the good moves of a bad party, while still pointing out the bad ones.
Peace!
Appreciate the comparison to the Taliban. Makes you look very reasonable and not all unhinged.
Pro-tip: stop being a fundamentalist, and you won't be getting compared to one.