Well, Europe requires more work
Well, then i have to use vpn to get vpn 
I mean this is basically just whitelabeled mullvad VPN.
I tried both. Found Mozilla VPN waaaay faster… So I switched back to it
I guess so, since there’s already an AUR PKGBUILD available.
I’m using mullvad on linux just using the inbuilt wireguard + wg-tools, you don’t need a proprietary client. Is there anything stopping you from doing the same with the mozilla rebrand? Do they not allow you to download wireguard keys?
Finally having a revenue source outside of Google should be a good thing.
Mozilla VPN is just a rebrand of Mullvad VPN except it’s cheaper. So Mullvad is benefiting by having an expanded market to more people through Mozilla’s marketing and brand recognition while Mozilla is getting a cut for relatively few resources. Win-win.
edit: I should note that I do not have explicit knowledge of what the contract and business relationship looks like between Mozilla and Mullvad, but I expect there’s a profit component for Mozilla (otherwise why bother).
it is when ure ceo gets $2.4mil
https://www.reddit.com/r/firefox/comments/kvx9t4/mozilla_vpn_is_now_available_for_linux_mac/gj1dezt/
I can’t say for sure, but I do know you can already get it working in Linux using an app called mozwire. That downloads configurations to match it to a standard wireguard install. So if you can get wireguard to run on your router, I wouldn’t see why not.
If you run your own firmware, it should be fine as there is a linux client out. Can’t speak to performance. Many manufacturer firmwares only offer no or only very specific types of VPN integration, so it’s probably not going to be an option on those.
If modding or replacing your router is out of the question, you can always set up a separate linux host on your local network and use that as gateway for your other devices.
Whatever it takes to get Mozilla independent from Google.
Relevant question imo and principially needs an answer
Does Mozilla view their VPN as a potential tool to wield influence - of any kind - on its users?
Is there any risk at all, no matter how small, that users of Mozilla VPN can risk not being able to visit certain websites or not able to use certain kinds of network based services solely because of Mozillas actions/filters/blocks/404s?
If not, a written statement hosted on their own website is not too much to ask
Because nobody is actually reading the page, and the folks here seem to think Firefox wants to throw conservative sites to the metaphorical gulag, this is what they actually want:
Reveal who is paying for advertisements, how much they are paying and who is being targeted.
Commit to meaningful transparency of platform algorithms so we know how and what content is being amplified, to whom, and the associated impact.
Turn on by default the tools to amplify factual voices over disinformation.
Work with independent researchers to facilitate in-depth studies of the platforms’ impact on people and our societies, and what we can do to improve things.
1 and 2 are unanimously good no matter what side you’re on. 3 relates to Facebook that intentionally fed folks bad info. 4 is unanimously good.
Stop reading just headlines
I can say that it’s $5 in the US.
I don’t know if the price varies for other locations.
Browser only? Whole machine?
I use it on my PC. Whole machine.
How many devices per account?
5
Special software?
Yes, it has a client you download and install.
Will it work on a router/raspi to secure the whole home?
I don’t know.
While I agree with you in principle…
Maybe it’s impossible or not realistic with their resources
This is a very accurate assessment.
Check out PeerTube. It’s for video hosting (like YouTube), but it’s federated.
This video explains it: What is PeerTube? - Framatube
More info: https://joinpeertube.org
Modern problems require modern solutions