121–130 of 137 posts
This is the only natural conclusion in a world where sovereign countries legislate the internet according to their values and tech companies follow local laws. Regulatory backlash isn't always going to be GDPR. Sometimes it's going to be this.
What is the alternative- the internet is ruled by US laws? No way in hell would I sign up for that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not unreasonable for a sovereign country to exercise control over legal media in its territory. It might not be just, or fair, for residents of that country, but it is reasonable.
A government exercising control over the media in its country is a very clear-cut violation of the value of free-speech. The moral question is whether American companies should help foreign governments shut down free-speech. Just like google in China. And the consensus seems to be "No."
This is the only natural conclusion in a world where sovereign countries legislate the internet according to their values and tech companies follow local laws. Regulatory backlash isn't always going to be GDPR. Sometimes it's going to be this.
Well yeah Netflix does business in Saudi Arabia so they have to follow the local laws. I honestly don't get why this is so shocking? What is the alternative- the internet is ruled by US laws? No way in hell would I sign up for that.
no one is what i think they are getting at
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The style is very formulaic in my opinion. Find something outrageous someone said or did or contradicting themself, then say "that would be like if..." And make an extreme analogy usually with crude or sexual humor. Personally, it's tiring and the information density is too low. And sometimes the logic of the analogy doesn't work, and they pretend the analogy proves something even though analogies never do, they can…
why is information density a meaningful metric for comedy? i agree with the rest of your point, it's formulaic and repetitive at this point
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well yeah Netflix does business in Saudi Arabia so they have to follow the local laws. I honestly don't get why this is so shocking? What is the alternative- the internet is ruled by US laws? No way in hell would I sign up for that.
> the internet is ruled by no one is what i think they are getting at
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I renounce you at least. Bye
We've banned this account for repeatedly breaking the site guidelines and ignoring our requests to stop. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
This is the only natural conclusion in a world where sovereign countries legislate the internet according to their values and tech companies follow local laws. Regulatory backlash isn't always going to be GDPR. Sometimes it's going to be this.
Well yeah Netflix does business in Saudi Arabia so they have to follow the local laws. I honestly don't get why this is so shocking? What is the alternative- the internet is ruled by US laws? No way in hell would I sign up for that.
> What is the alternative- the internet is ruled by US laws
Your notions of national sovereignty and individual freedom are so terrible, I don’t know if I should even respond.
Individual sovereignty supersedes governmental authority in a civil-libertarian moral-political framework. No government has any sort of moral right to be violent against a person for speech.
And the concept of national sovereignty is a farce. Countries like China and SA are not even democracies, so by respecting their “sovereignty” you’re respecting the minorities in power over those countries.
But even democracies have absolutely no right to claim sovereignty — having 60% of a country’s vote will never legitimize erasing fundamental human freedoms. (Or else everything the NSDAP did would be morally A-OK.)
A general moral operating principle to apply when analyzing political issues is the “zero aggression principle”: https://www.zeroaggressionproject.org
First time I've heard of the show. I watched about 20 minutes ... pretty good. The style reminds me of Samantha B ... political commentary sprinkled with humor.
The style is very formulaic in my opinion. Find something outrageous someone said or did or contradicting themself, then say "that would be like if..." And make an extreme analogy usually with crude or sexual humor. Personally, it's tiring and the information density is too low. And sometimes the logic of the analogy doesn't work, and they pretend the analogy proves something even though analogies never do, they can…
This is the only natural conclusion in a world where sovereign countries legislate the internet according to their values and tech companies follow local laws. Regulatory backlash isn't always going to be GDPR. Sometimes it's going to be this.
Well yeah Netflix does business in Saudi Arabia so they have to follow the local laws. I honestly don't get why this is so shocking? What is the alternative- the internet is ruled by US laws? No way in hell would I sign up for that.