Recently I discovered a good (and long) article dissecting Digdeeper's way of thinking and a few of his articles. https://purplepriest.codeberg.page/articles/refdd.html The tl;dr is Digdeeper's way of thinking is conspiratorial and is harmful to himself by going after non-existent threats with an incoherent message. I've known of Digdeeper since 2018 or 2019 and even back then he showed this way of thinking, along with absolutist stances that fail to create coherent messages. The articles goes more in depth on the harms of conspiratorial thinking and explains it better than I could. The short version is that it wastes time on pointless, non-existent issues that could be spent instead on larger, more important issues that do exist. As for absolutist thinking, this is more a personal observation I've seen over the years. His definition of what constitutes spyware is so broad and encompassing that nearly everything falls under the term. Auto-updates, while controversial to some is not spyware. Tracking pixels and other website tracking content loaded by a homepage default by the browser, that can be changed, does not make the browser itself spyware. Should people have the option to choose if their software auto updates or not, and what their default homepage is? Yes, but it's disproportionate to say a browser is spyware for doing these. I believe Digdeeper's beliefs are genuine for anti-Capitalism and pro-privacy/security/anonymity, but conspiratorial and absolutist thinking in his message is doing more harm than any kind of perceived censorship of his site could do.

What do you think on the article or Digdeeper? Anything you think the article missed or did not go into enough depth into?

is it too conspirational? yes. is it maybe harmful? yeah maybe. however we need these kind of minds in our civilization. they test the boundaries that normies can't even consider to explore. they populate the mental arena for those who wish to seek.