Yep I haven't tried the other alternatives VPN listed myself because I have the feeling that they're not as mature and advanced as Mullvad which seems to be ahead in this game.

 

This is all way less nefarious as it seems ... if you use a VPN Google sees a lot of the traffic that comes in as if it were all from one computer. And that is suspicious, could be part of a DDoS attack, at least it looks a bit like that. Because you are not alone on an IP over the VPN. See ... no evil to see here, everythings normal.

And as always: the conspiracy-suspecting superbrains are the first to come up with some stupid theories ...

No, I am not advocating for Google. Use Startpage or DuckDuckGo and your VPN and you are fine.

 

In my last comment on this thread I expressed that I hoped you would let it go. No such luck. Instead you persist with absolutely ridiculous comments.

"No one reads the New York Times"

You said the above in relation to my comment that the growing popularity of Mullvad has increased problems with the service. I pointed out a Times review that I felt had a big effect on their popularity, but also meant an increasing number of sites know their VPN server IP addresses which creates problems.

FYI, in 2022, the New York Times ranked #30 on the worldwide web for site traffic! Let me put that in simpler terms that hopefully you can understand... on the entire world wide web only 29 sites had more traffic then the NY Times. That level of traffic translated to over 350 MILLION visitors to their site in 2022. But I guess you must be correct, no one reads the NY Times!

You then refer to one of their most popular columns, "Wirecutter", as a "minor citation". Well, if the site is getting over 350 MILLION visits a year, and Wirecutter is one of their most popular columns, that means MILLIONS of people are seeing those reviews. You should only be so lucky to get such a "minor citation" for anything you ever do in your life! BTW, Wirecutter has become so popular on that website that the NY Times recently decided to put it behind their paywall. You now have to pay if you want to be able to read about their product testing and reviews.

You also claim the Mullvad review I referred to was from back in 2020. Not only are you incorrect again, but apparently your googling skills leave something to be desired. The most recent review was from just last month! They frequently re-print and publish Wirecutter reviews with updated information.


In one of your comments you seemed to be saying that Reddit was a better source for opinions on Mullvad. I checked Reddit. Not a super busy subgroup for Mullvad over there, but I did find some folks saying the EXACT same things I had mentioned here about problems with Mullvad. Just last week u/somename777 started a thread called, "Too many sites are blocking Mullvad IPs these days."



Another one a couple of weeks ago by u/AndorinhaRiver was titled, "My experience with Mullvad - it's great for privacy, but not so much for other things". That comment talks about how 'websites are pretty quick to detect you're using Mullvad, which results in endless captchas'. So, maybe if you like Reddit better as a resource you should read what users there are saying a bit more carefully, it's pretty much exactly what I was saying here, and I'm glad to see at least some other people are picking up on these concerns as well.



I don't care if your opinion differs from mine, but when you make ridiculously erroneous comments and in one instance even misrepresent what I said here, it requires correction. People reading these threads on Audiosex deserve to be given honest information.

 

Just one thing though the NY Times is a paid website and 2nd you lack basic logic skills. Even if the NY Times was free of access and ranked number one in the world, it wouldn't mean that your particular section would be the most read LOL what's wrong with people these days they don't even get Logic 101 principles

And you just confirm I was also right when I said that out of 8 billion people the masses don't have a clue about this particular VPN, 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% people in the world have at best seen your mention/article (and even less have purchased it as a result of reading it)...