VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits

Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by ssl-3 on Saturday December 13, 2025 @10:10PM (#46260464)

...then I'll just have to learn how to get stuff done with 512MB of RAM.

(I'm sure that browsers like lynx still work just like they did in 2001, and that pine can still read mail. Shouldn't be a problem, right?)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by YouAreWRONGtoo on Sunday December 14, 2025 @03:53AM (#46261736)

links2 is still a work horse in 2025 for occasional debugging.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by ssl-3 on Sunday December 14, 2025 @04:17AM (#46261841)

I know of links and have used it, but I don't think I've ever used links2.

Am I correct to assume that links2 is more of the same/better?

(Also: Your comment seems perfectly sane, but it was already marked as "flagged" by the time I saw it 18 minutes after it was submitted. I vouched for it.

But I wonder: Whose ruffles did you panty in order for your comments to land this way?)

[ Parent | on HN ]

[dead]

Re:VPN location claims don't match real traffic exits by vpShane on Sunday December 14, 2025 @03:24PM (#46266490)

Naw you'll have to email dang and ask him they have a auto system, I got auto shadow banned once and had to email them, they said I didn't do anything wrong and then restored all my comments. I went like 3 months thinking nobody liked my comments enough to give me an up point. Worth reaching out about their auto mod is sensitive

[ Parent | on HN ]