Futel
futel.net
futel.net
https://web.archive.org/web/20210312063737/https://www.2600....
> We do not judge the motivations of our users
In an age of doxing, swatting, and cold-calling telemarketers, I hope that some tracability (at least by the network operators themselves) is in there.
What is really needed everywhere is personal responsibility and accountability, but, seeing as how that's in short supply on Earth, we need dogs to guard our chicken coops.
Good luck with your good intentions; I hope it is a help to society, and not another brick in the wall of technological misery.
But anonymity can be a crucial tool for resisting evil regimes.
I wish there were a perfect solution.
The only real solution is to have honorable actors on both sides: the citizenry and their govt.
What that means is that we're left with, at best, trying to find the second best solution.
I would kindly ask anyone stating that they provide a service for free, to explain exactly how they are planning on financing it, and for which amount of time, so that users can decide how much trust to place on its survival, and how risky it is to build a dependence on it.
We all know that money doesn't grow on trees, no need to treat us like children.
> so that users can decide how much trust to place on its survival, and how risky it is to build a dependence on it
Dependence? This is for people who have no other access to phone calls. I find it funny to complain about such a service when there is no alternative for the target users.
Explicit is always better than implicit, when the word "free" is used.
> Dependence? This is for people who have no other access to phone calls. I find it funny to complain about such a service when there is no alternative for the target users.
That's exactly the point.
Should target users treat these phones as a reliable alternative? Or should they make it one of their first priorities to gain some other access to phone calls? That question remains unanswered, and I argue it is very important for the target users.