Earlier quoted context omitted.
Facebook/WhatsApp is trying to have it both ways. Either it's a for profit private company (and it can do things like that), or it's an important communication medium for a democracy (and access should be open). When it comes to blocking telegram, Facebook/WhatsApp wants to be the provate for profit company. When some judge blocks WhatsApp, suddenly they're an important service for a democracy.
> Either it's a for profit private company (and it can do things like that), or it's an important communication medium for a democracy (and access should be open). Blocking telegram is classic bone-headed stupidity. It's like an invitation for government lawyers to burrow under your skin and lay their eggs. But inconsistency only shows that one of their positions is wrong, and it's that one.
WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
151–160 of 172 posts
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe this is obvious, or that I'm wrong, but the issue in Brazil is that most Brazilians are left-wing conservatives AND within in recent past put the current government in power. Long term this is the issue, not these "cyber attacks" - which are to me very problematic, but only a symptom of the issue.
I'm not sure which "cyber attacks" you are talking about. It's about a judge ordering Whatsapp to be taken offline for 72 hours for not complying with a court order, or am I missing something?
__
* Hyperbolic metaphor: https://sesquiotic.wordpress.com/2011/02/02/can-a-metaphor-b...
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#153> the idea that everyone in Brazil can be denied the freedom to communicate the way they want is very scary in a democracy Says the person (in name of the company, I assume) whose company blocks things they don't "like", such as messages containing telegram.org or telegram.me[1]. Now Facebook is not a democracy and they can block and censor pretty much any message they like, but now they go on to tell Brazil how it s…
Linking to telegram works just fine. http://imgur.com/FOnR6ls
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#154Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#155> the idea that everyone in Brazil can be denied the freedom to communicate the way they want is very scary in a democracy Says the person (in name of the company, I assume) whose company blocks things they don't "like", such as messages containing telegram.org or telegram.me[1]. Now Facebook is not a democracy and they can block and censor pretty much any message they like, but now they go on to tell Brazil how it s…
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then don’t operate in the country.
They quite literally don't. They operate a service on a global network that can be contacted from Brazil.
If I operated a company in Liberland that had an onlineshop selling Crystal meth to customers in the US, my packages would also be intercepted.
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#157Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fucking dodgy/unacceptable. I know they did this for another site that gave money to people for spamming their connections with links to their website, which I guess is borderline acceptable. In the case of telegram though, there is no redeeming circumstance of any kind, they're just censoring for a business advantage [without it being directly visible to the user, which is even worse], and that's just really…
> censoring Classifying a recipient receiving a message containing exactly what the sender sent as 'censorship' just because they don't auto-link it is taking the word to new heights of rhetorical meaninglessness. Dodgy and scummy, sure. Mildly inconvenient for the recipient, definitely. Censorship, no.
Whatsapp not only blocks auto-linking, but they also prevent the link from being copied to the clipboard. "Censorship" sounds about right.
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
They quite literally don't. They operate a service on a global network that can be contacted from Brazil.
Then they shouldn’t be surprised if they’re blocked. If I operated a company in Liberland that had an onlineshop selling Crystal meth to customers in the US, my packages would also be intercepted.
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know in which country you live, but I am very happy we have rulings here in Germany blocking access to businesses if those businesses are not following the law. WhatsApp, even if a US based company, is defacto providing a service in Brazil, it means they have to follow Brazilian laws. Dura Lex Sed Lex. You have more context on the other submission[0] showing that WhatsApp had way enough time to take the reque…
Blocking access should be a last resort, for businesses that are doing something extremely harmful. It's a consumer protection measure, not a punishment. If a business is breaking the law, you punish them with fines and the police, not by redirecting the mail/phone/packets directed at them. The citizens are the ones initiating contact with WhatsApp servers. They're the ones really being blocked here. Even though they…
You go to court and explain it's impossible. Sticking your fingers in your ears and singing is a poor strategy and deserves to be punished.
Re: WhatsApp is back online in Brazil
#160We dodged this bullet but here in Brazil but RIGHT NOW there is a much more dangerous risk: with the Parliamentary Commission on Cybercrimes (CPI dos Crimes Cibernéticos / CPICIBER) report a "combo" of bills will get "fast track" on Congress and, to list some things, expand data retention, allow access to IP addresses without warrant and allow judges to block "illegal" content, including copyright violations much lik…
Your page isn't clear, what exactly happens tomorrow? Is it the final voting on the CPI? Or is there some law project under vote right now?