• Greenpepper@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Another good use for VPN is to counter dynamic pricing. My wife visited a website some time ago to request the price for a ticket. When she visited the website a second time the price had increased considerably. However when visiting the price with VPN it was the original price again. It saved her a lot of money.

  • floofloof@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    The title should be “You should understand what a VPN is for, before using one.”

  • mateomaui@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Spends most of article telling you why they probably aren’t necessary.

    Ends with 4 examples why they’re useful, which are the main reasons they’re used to begin with.

    • Gamma@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I feel like the opening sentences explained the reasoning behind the article sufficiently, even when there are plenty of valid use cases for them. This was mostly a response to manipulative marketing tactics:

      Virtual Private Networks, or VPNs, are popular services for (supposedly) increasing your security and privacy on the internet. They are often marketed as all-encompassing security tools, and something that you absolutely need to keep hackers at bay. However, many of the selling points for VPNs are exaggerated or just outright false.

      They’re not the only ones pointing this out, either. Tom Scott released a video on the topic a few years ago to explain his thoughts VPN sponsorships

      • mateomaui@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Your comment in no way negates my observation. If the clickbait title of the article was “You probably don’t need a VPN to avoid market tracking” or something similar, you’d have a point.

        • Gamma@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          I was simply adding information your comment had left out, it wasn’t negating information at all. So congrats on getting the point, not everyone is trying to argue 🎉

          • mateomaui@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            You may want to reconsider your phrasing then if you don’t want it to appear to be argumentative.

            • ConstableJelly@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              11 months ago

              Neutral party here, I read it naturally as a supplement to your comment, not an opposition. I don’t detect an argumentative tone personally.

              • mateomaui@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                You’re welcome to your opinion but these phrases

                I feel like the opening sentences explained the reasoning behind the article sufficiently,

                They’re not the only ones pointing this out, either.

                are oppositional in tone.