Here’s the actual privacy policy of an actual Mozilla product. Instead of being dry like privacy policies typically are, this one is practically dripping with malicious compliance.

Your Privacy Rights. In accordance with applicable law, you may have the right to…

Request to Opt-Out of Certain Processing Activities including, as applicable, if we process your personal information for “targeted advertising” (as “targeted advertising” is defined by applicable privacy laws), if we “sell” your personal information (as “sell” is defined by applicable privacy laws), or if we engage in “profiling” in furtherance of certain “decisions that produce legal or similarly significant effects” concerning you (as such terms are defined by applicable privacy laws)

It’s no longer a question of if Mozilla targets you, sells your data, or profiles you. It’s a question of when, and how abusively.

…We “sell” and “share” your personal information to provide you with “cross-context behavioral advertising” about Fakespot’s products and services.

Again, no scare quotes are needed here. They sell your data. I don’t know what “cross-context behavioral advertising” is exactly, but I’m not excited to find out.

Cameron Ortis said this while he was on trial for leaking info to criminals…

After a complex trial, which included redacted documents and shielded testimony, the jury found Ortis guilty of leaking special operational information “without authority” to Phantom Secure CEO Vincent Ramos — who sold encrypted cellphones to organized crime members — and to Salim Henareh and Muhammad Ashraf, two men police suspected of being agents of an international money-laundering network with ties to terrorists.

He also was found guilty of trying to leak information to Farzam Mehdizadeh. One RCMP witness told Ortis’s trial he believes Mehdizadeh worked with "the most important money launderers in the world.

The corporation doesn’t have to stifle 100% of their criticism, they just need to disseminate enough of a counternarrative, with PR statements that are technically true enough, to overpower the criticism so that it no longer matters.

(Plus, based on your last comment, I know you already have a “they can moderate anything they feel like” response lined up, if they do start clamping down even harder where they can.)

Your account history is public

The most significant quote is from Proton itself, which made an official statement in favor of Republican and JD Vance.

I haven’t seen many people simply post archives to the now-deleted contents of what Proton said, which is pretty damning in its own right. Before Proton realized their mistake, started erasing their original replies, and crafting a much less damning-looking narrative.

I’ve reviewed the article that tries to ascertain Andy Yen’s politics (as if doing this would have been less weird if it was unabashed love of Democrats) and I agree it’s pretty bad in several ways.

But the backlash on Reddit could be contained!

• Half of it was on their subreddit, which they have full control over
• Half of it was on r/privacy, which got removed by a Proton fan.