Largely correct as far as I can tell.

  • sir_reginald@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    this was written by someone who hasn’t used I2P much, because they seem to be completely unaware of outproxies.

    Edit: After mentioning multiple times that it was not possible to browse the cleanet from I2P, they say:

    Although it’s technically possible to use an I2P connection to browse the regular internet, there are very few exit nodes, and the ones that exist are often quickly taken down.

    I’ve been using the same outproxy for six months in a row.

    Edit 2: okay, I’ve finished reading the article and it’s pushing NordVPN. They’ve lost the little credibility they had.

    • CAVOK@lemmy.worldOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah. There are a few things wrong, like Torbrowser being chromium as someone pointed out, and outproxies like you say, but it’s still not the worst summary I’ve seen.

      • sir_reginald@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        looking at the website it seems like yet another site trying to make profit from VPN affiliated links, but the I2P vs Tor analysis wasn’t that bad, yeah.

        I wish they fixed the outproxy part tho. You can even host one yourself routing it through Tor so you’ve got the best of both worlds.

  • fogetaboutit
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    nordvpn

    Isnt this a conflict of interest? Lol what a weird article.