this post was submitted on 26 Jun 2026
367 points (96.9% liked)

Privacy

10105 readers
954 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
iopq@lemmy.world
367
The Mullvad founder gave millions to extremist far right party (mastodon.social)
submitted 12 hours ago by e8d79@discuss.tchncs.de to c/privacy@lemmy.world
156 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

The IT company Mullvad’s founder Daniel Berntsson is behind a giant donation to the populist Örebro Party, which advocates “comprehensive re-immigration” from Sweden. “It’s sad that it’s needed,” he told Flamman.

~ https://www.flamman.se/techprofil-ger-miljoner-till-orebropartiet/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] x00z@lemmy.world 12 points 6 hours ago (4 children)

The title is misleading because it doesn't mention the millions are in Swedish Krona (I presume).

5 million krona would be €450 800.

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 1 points 11 minutes ago

Isn't it kroner or is that a different currency?

[–] matlag@sh.itjust.works 6 points 4 hours ago

1 cent for that cause was already too much!

[–] WalrusDragonOnABike@reddthat.com 3 points 5 hours ago

That's still the majority of the donation for that entire party. All from a single person.

[–] farmgineer@nord.pub -2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

A Swedish article in a Swedish publication about a Swedish guy and his Swedish company paying in Swedish kroner is misleading?

[–] trolololol@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

You forgot to say the part where the title is in English but the currency is not mentioned. Is it pounds? Euros? Nope, Swedish crowns. Since when it's acceptable to skip the currency no matter what it is?

[–] farmgineer@nord.pub 0 points 2 hours ago

I still disagree. It's also why it's important to not judge things only on a title. It's still a lot of money in just about any currency that would be reasonably used in this case. At best it's ambiguous, but I would not call it misleading.