Rule 4, OP.

The post is just an ad disguised as a guide

That said:

its obvious they want to be like google but with “privacy” as a gimmic because its only private until they get a government order telling them to do something to unmask a user or monitor an email.

Besides the fact that Proton is based in Switzerland where government warrants aren’t issued willy-nilly, please learn how the mathematics behind encryption works – or, if not, at least trust that it does. For emails that are sent E2EE, Proton can only have garbled data that requires a key they don’t have.

You’re just constantly talking out your ass, and I have no idea why; it’s so unearned. Like I’m not going to debate you on whether ads or corporations are good because a) I broadly agree and b) that’s just, like, our opinions, man, but then you just say shit that’s so demonstrably untrue that all I can think is: “I fucking hate what this decade has done to people.”

Before I address the substance: that’s not what an ad hominem is in the context of an argument. I’d already 100% finished attacking the substance of their argument. An ad hominem would be if I fallaciously appealed to a personal characteristic (real or otherwise) to attack an argument of theirs. “You’re wrong because you’re a dipshit”.

Anyway: man, I dunno. It’s 2026, and I’ve gotten really fucking sick of being unilaterally bound by etiquette when the bullshit asymmetry principle and the Dunning–Kruger effect are being stretched to their limits by insufferable, insolent shitheads who’ve unburdened themselves of critical thinking and assume having a platform to the entire world makes them qualified to say anything about everything (I can fall into this trap too, but holy shit sometimes).

I was still more polite than they were, still exercised more critical thought than they did, and still addressed the substance, and that’s fine enough by me not to tone police myself.

but i guess thats why I don’t work in marketing

Yeah, I guess it is, because this article works in Proton’s favor on multiple levels:

• Plenty of Proton users have switched over from Gmail, still have their old account, and still, even with forwarding, occasionally need to use those old addresses.
• People who search for or are sent a guide who’ve never or rarely heard of Proton might end up on their site and read a guide that lambasts Google and its usage of AI.
• Meanwhile, Proton’s alternative product is being advertised everywhere on the page outside the guide and even is advertised within it.
• These guides are going to exist anyway (many, in fact). You’re acting like this is some extremely niche thing users might want to do. Having your own guide but poisoned with your marketing when you’re the underdog is a sound idea.
• This gives a benevolent image of “Good Guy Proton” who just wants to keep people’s data private regardless of business – and a “Bad Guy Google” image because it’s apparently so dire that their competition has to do this.
• Consumers becoming more privacy-conscious generally is a boon long-term for businesses like Proton.

You’re so smarmy about this but just come off as a complete dipshit who gave this two seconds of thought.

Hey, if you remember, the last time you whined about this, I appended the most recent 2025 position to the bottom of the list – just to soothe your oh-so-good-faith concern that the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics might’ve decided between 2016 and now that “actually, modern medical research is bullshit and plant-based dieting is unhealthy”.

Adding to what you said, I’ll just drop this here.

The “Ronda Center Tourist Apartments” in the background adds a funny touch. Specifically tourists. I wonder if Nathan Drake checked in while he uses this bridge for climbing practice.

Technically the numerical code still gives you a precise search key to find other people discussing the same issue.

… You know, as would be useful for a serious operating system where online support doesn’t mean trawling the bowels of Reddit praying somebody’s had the same issue and found a reproducible solution.

American Megatrends flashbacks

Trade tensions between the US and Europe had eased since the two sides struck a deal at Trump’s Turnberry golf course in Scotland in July.

God, even amid everything else, this sentence is so fucking rancid.

… I guess as opposed to the Elon kind of African American?

Do they mean that he was impersonating ICE by wearing their uniform or that he was impersonating them by violently breaking into a random home without a warrant?

Okay, that at least clears some things up. I haven’t checked the other four papers you listed, to be clear, but Brenner & Chertow (1994) isn’t even about analgesics generically. I’m perplexed that you didn’t just link to the abstract for Penna et al. (2021) to begin with, especially because it doesn’t seem like you’ve read any of these or the paper you got them from. That’s why I assumed an LLM: because even reading just reading the title of Brenner & Chertow (1994), you can tell it’s only tangentially relevant to what’s being discussed.

EDIT: See deliriousdreams’ explanation below; my guess was wrong.

Uhhh… Just as a quick spot check, Brenner & Chertow (1994) doesn’t mention acetaminophen/paracetamol even a single time (checked the full paper). Did you use an LLM to generate this list?

It’s arguably silly to answer this administration’s transparent firehose of falsehoods – whose believers do not care about medical science – by scrambling to put together lists debunking them, but if you’re going to do that, at least do it right.

No problem at all. Full disclosure: I’m a longtime member of and frequent contributor to Wikipedia. I have a bias in this. I’ll say, however, that because we’re not a monolith, internal criticism of the project is varied, rampant, and welcomed. It’s no surprise when everyone is a volunteer and the entire draw of editing is “this thing sucks; make it better”. Criticism is so prolific that for the project’s 25th anniversary, the English Wikipedia’s official newsletter, The Signpost, published a dire, 6500-word warning about our trajectory.

We’re constantly looking for criticism so we can improve, and it’s why, if you can believe it, we love seeing new faces and articles published like “I tried to edit Wikipedia for a week; here’s how it burned my house down”. What we don’t value is criticism made in bad faith; there’s nothing to talk about when one side of the discussion wants to just sit around and Gish gallop all day for transparent political ends.

For those out of the loop, this user’s entire purpose on Lemmy is to spread negative coverage of Wikipedia, one of the few remaining strongholds against far-right disinformation.

And yes, that does include signal-boosting criticism from literally anyone who’s against the project, including Israeli courts, US House Republicans…

Effectively, their job is to stir up FUD.

Ah, yeah, I knew what you meant. I just thought it was funny imagining the serious tone of Blade Runner’s replicants pasted onto Reddit bots astroturfing for Burger King.

Quite an experience to live in fear, isn’t it? That’s what it is to be a corporate troll manipulating public opinion.

This blog post was plausibly written by AI. Look at the fabricated source on the 2020 study and at the wording.