Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

turkeyblocks.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 476 posts

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#351

Post by ue_ »

andai wrote: post #246
ue_ wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Go ahead and abolish all your own property, you're free to do so. I do not own any private property. >Or was it more about you wanting to be entitled to product of your fellow man's labor? No; in fact, the exact opposite. It is about the worker owning the product of his own labour, rather than having it appropriated when production has finished. To each according to his labour.

You've figured out something very important, which is that as an employee, you never get to see most (ie. all , beyond the limit of your wage) of the value you create.

Well, I didn't figure it out as much as Marx, Engels, Kropotkin and Proudhon did.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#352

Post by toor2 »

cryptarch wrote: post #203

Totally agree. Have a look at some controversial pages if you've never encountered one, like this one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_assignment I'm triggered so here's my soapbox: Wikipedia currently undermines the idea that human beings have a sex that is grounded in biological reality, and pushes the notion of "sex assigned at birth", the unreality of biological sex and the reality of transgenderism as non-ment…

Your post is so problematic I can't even begin to dismantle it without wasting half my day.

Please keep your transphobic layman interpretation of old school medicine to your self.

gross

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#353

Post by Al-Khwarizmi »

isostatic wrote: post #205
ardaozkal wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> while controlling all the media It's much, much more than that. Every single billboard and half the TV ads before referendum were ads telling people to vote "yes". People didn't even know what they were voting for.

People trust him. He provides "Stong and Stable Leadership", he's built roads and delivered on his promises. He then says "I need you to vote for this to give me extraordinary powers", and people trust him - especially as the opposition is in disarray Hopefully people will see this for what it is and not vote Tory on June 8th.

Whenever I see a politician calling for strong and stable leadership (happens in Spain, too), I know that's a politician I'm not going to vote.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#354

Post by mtmail »

sanderjd wrote: post #318
denzil_correa wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Turkey is nothing like the common stereotypes we have of it in the West From what I see, there are two Turkeys - the liberal Turkey which resides in cities like Izmir and the conservative ones which come from places like Bursa or Gaziantep. Currently, there are fewer liberal Turks than the conservative ones. > People in the West need to wake up and do their due diligence on Erdogan's regime On this point, I've alwa…

I don't understand why Altay's comment is dead. I found it interestingly and informative. Unpopular opinions reasonably expressed should not be killed.

Check the user's comment history. It's not that comment in particular. The whole account is blocked for wishing people dead, calling people scum, insulting other users and expressing sadness that a genocide program ended to early. There's unpopular opinions and there's crossing the line.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#355

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

sanderjd wrote: post #334
RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #7

I think 2016 will go down as the high water mark for a global Internet. I see a lot of countries looking at the success of China in keeping political control, and the failure of Egypt, Tunisia, etc where the open Internet was used to overthrow the regime and deciding that allowing an open, free internet is not in their best interests. If you think that Western, liberal democracies are exempt from this, just look at t…

> the whole dodge that the first amendment only applies to the government is dangerous As a supporter of that "dodge", allow me to defend it (though I don't really disagree with your comment in general). Freedom of speech as a principle has a fundamental tension. One person's freedom to speak must be balanced with another person's freedom to exclude that speech from their private life. Private folks having the abilit…

Just how far are you willing to go with this? If people having opinion X, are banned on social media and no private registrar will register their website, no private search engine will index their website, no private employer will hire them, no private bank will do business with them or lend them money, no conference will invite them even for unrelated talks, no open source project will accept their contribution, no private media company will run their advertisements, and no private college will allow them on campus or admit them, are you OK with this situation? After all, they can still write to the government and go to town halls and spout their opinion.

This scenario is not that far-fetched because: 1) There has been more consolidation into fewer large companies​, with less competition 2) Many companies share board members with similar opinions and sympathies and have leadership with similar sympathies. 3) Because of social media, it is easy to get a large group of people to put coordinated pressure on a company. 4) This scenario would just be an extreme example of the "no platform" movement which we already have, and which has already successfully pressured individual companies to dissociate with people or opinions.

It is respect for the principle of free speech in the general population that protects us from this scenario. If you are OK with this scenario for some opinions, be aware that throughout history, what is an unpopular opinion has changed, sometimes relatively rapidly.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#356

Post by dragly »

sverhagen wrote: post #76
dragly wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denmark, Finland, France and many other countries censor The Pirate Bay: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_blocking_access_to_T...

That link says: blocking access due to copyright issues. Respectfully, I don't think you're doing justice to the Turkish freedom of speech issue of Wikipedia being blocked by bringing up The Pirate Bay.

I did not mean to compare the two cases at all and am sorry if it came out that way. I just wanted to answer the parent post on 'what the "anomalies" this site detects in Denmark, Finland, and France represent' by pointing out that TPB is blocked/censored in these countries. I only meant to point out one possible reason why the above site listed these countries.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#357

Post by pishpash »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #355
sanderjd wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the whole dodge that the first amendment only applies to the government is dangerous As a supporter of that "dodge", allow me to defend it (though I don't really disagree with your comment in general). Freedom of speech as a principle has a fundamental tension. One person's freedom to speak must be balanced with another person's freedom to exclude that speech from their private life. Private folks having the abilit…

Just how far are you willing to go with this? If people having opinion X, are banned on social media and no private registrar will register their website, no private search engine will index their website, no private employer will hire them, no private bank will do business with them or lend them money, no conference will invite them even for unrelated talks, no open source project will accept their contribution, no…

The solution to that is simple. Apply free speech rules to entities, even private ones, that have grown to have government-like powers in the lives of people. They serve the same function as government.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#358

Post by dragly »

masklinn wrote: post #74
dragly wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Denmark, Finland, France and many other countries censor The Pirate Bay: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countries_blocking_access_to_T...

So… that's a case of dishonestly conflating shutting down a locally illegal operations and speech/political censorship. Hardly helping the case.

Sorry, but I did not intend to compare or conflate the two cases. I wanted to give an answer to the parent poster why those countries might be listed on the above site.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#359

Post by bad_user »

richard_shelton wrote: post #144
azangru wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being a Russian, I am naturally very curious about this idea of the Russian propaganda getting a stronger and stronger influence over the minds of people in other countries. Could you kindly elaborate on the following issues that mystify me: - Where do people get the Russian news and why do they care about what Russia has to say? I mean, I don't follow Polish news (or French news, or German news, etc.); so why would…

Yes, I can understand your wondering (I'm a Russian too). When I hear about the waves of Russian propaganda all around the globe I can't stop to ask myself a question: "how we become so powerful?". I'm afraid that nowadays some people tend to call any opposite opinion in their countries as a Russian propaganda. And I can understand that with a lack of good opposition/alternative media people start to read Russia Toda…

> On a serious note, I think that the only way to fight with the streams of fakes (regardless the country) is a restriction of anonymity on the Internet.

Please stop suggesting that.

There's zero evidence that removing anonymity works and in that process we lose our online privacy. And I think anonymity is precisely what we need to preserve freedom.

Also people are simply jackasses, real names or not. If you don't believe me, engage in conversations on Facebook about politics sometimes. There's nothing that shakes my faith in humanity faster.

Re: Wikipedia blocked in Turkey

#360

Post by xj9 »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #7

I think 2016 will go down as the high water mark for a global Internet. I see a lot of countries looking at the success of China in keeping political control, and the failure of Egypt, Tunisia, etc where the open Internet was used to overthrow the regime and deciding that allowing an open, free internet is not in their best interests. If you think that Western, liberal democracies are exempt from this, just look at t…

i don't know what else we could have expected. the internet that people have access to is no longer decentralized. we need more of this. more systems that cannot be controlled or censored by any one party. applications, devices, and services that obey the users, rather than the developers, vendors, or service providers. not only do we need these things, we need to find effective, decentralized ways of pushing their adoption.

i've done some work in this space, but it is a hard path. we need more people working and innovating in creating viral alternatives to the present system. not only in technology, but in business. we don't need an economic landscape composed of kingdoms and fiefs, we need economic democracies: cooperatives and other worker-focused businesses. we need stronger communities. more strong connections to each other.

Post reply on HN