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

‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

news.umich.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 645 posts

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#391

Post by noodles_nomore »

pessimizer wrote: post #387
noodles_nomore wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

varispeed talks about control and manipulation. That's far broader than misinformation.

Yet also not "gambling content, pornography, or Match.com."

Sorry for being curt in the last reply. To expand on this, I think a key line might be

>bad actors use these techniques to control people to their advantage.

which I interpret broadly as enticing people to do things not sanctioned by the status quo morality. Some governments aren't happy about sexual liberty, others about certain religious or political belief. The internet with the liberation of information also liberated a certain relativism that is corrosive to the epistemic fundament of established power.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#392

Post by im3w1l »

dragonwriter wrote: post #103
war1025 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The interesting thing about this is that nationalism is in general associated with right-leaning politics, and the censorship is far and away being applied more aggressively to those very same right-leaning nationalist groups. You would be hard pressed to find liberal / progressive content being censored online.

> You would be hard pressed to find liberal / progressive content being censored online. No, I wouldn't. https://fair.org/home/that-facebook-will-turn-to-censoring-t... I might have to work harder to find high-traffic social-media accounts peddling stories about the left being censored online than finding the same thing about the right. But, if so, would that really be evidence that the right was being censored more…

The whole discussion is sapir-whorfed hard by the fake left-right nomenclature. Old-school-leftists, such as communists and socialists are catching ban-hammers, yes that's true. "Pronoun-left" on the other hand is not.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#393

Post by rsynnott »

systemvoltage wrote: post #226
babas wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I read that, I immediately dismissed the whole article. Both HRW and match.com are available on the 4/5 ISPs I have access to ATM. Home (Telenor), mobile (Telia), server host (domeneshop), my office (Telia, wired) and a customer network (Not sure about the downstream ISP). On the last one match.com is blocked by a firewall not the ISP. They should really check thier sources. My guess is that they tested on a net…

It could be a mistake, not an intentional lie.

It’s such an egregious mistake that you’d have to assume the rest of their data is similarly worthless.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#394

Post by RonanTheGrey »

slg wrote: post #98
paxys wrote: post #24

Fits well with the current wave of authoritarianism/nationalism that has taken root all over the world. A free and open internet represents everything that a government that wishes complete control over its people would be afraid of.

A free and open internet also allows propaganda and hate to flourish which are two bedrocks of most authoritarian and nationalist regimes. It isn't as simple as ending censorship will allow everyone to be free.

I'm curious -- what are you hoping that argument will accomplish?

Freedom of ANY kind allows bad things to happen. The most secure world is one in which we are all locked up, nobody ever interacts, and are only fed via tube from their government provided feeder in their government provided cube.

Since I'm fairly sure that isn't what you're advocating, please, explain what you're hoping to accomplish by stating that a free and open internet is a problem.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#395

Post by rsynnott »

etangent wrote: post #339
ojbyrne wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that the right has moved the Overton Window so much to the right that they see things that most of the world would see as mainstream (Black Lives Matter, Abortion, Medicare for All, Defund the Police, Anti-Fascism etc) as extreme.

Curious in what country you live in that sees "Defund the Police" as mainstream.

A number of countries have ripped up their police force and started again, to greater or lesser degrees, in the last few decades. The RUC would be a mild case, the Stasi an extreme one.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#396

Post by oceanplexian »

p1necone wrote: post #279
chrisco255 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've failed to make the case that the government is not a "bad actor". They've used all sorts of manufactured consensus techniques to get us into unjust wars or to give up our liberties (i.e. mass surveillance, lockdowns, etc) for over-blown threats. We aren't going to get education from the government. Open debate and discussion are really the only cure for propaganda.

What benefit do you think the government gets out of lockdowns? (other than the obvious one of stopping the spread of the pandemic).

The government isn’t a magic entity or intelligent AI that wants or doesn’t want things. The government is people. And a certain breed of people are magnetically attracted to power, which is part of human nature that goes back to the beginning of humanity. The benefit leaders get out of lockdowns is power, which regardless of its legitimacy or necessity is one of the most intoxicating and addictive things on Earth.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#397

Post by konjin »

triceratops wrote: post #351
konjin wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Joe Biden wrote the original Patriot act. Lets not pretend that liberalism doesn't come with a jackboot on the neck of the people either.

TIL: Joe Biden represents liberalism.

If you look at his cabinet pick so far yes. I hope you're ready for Trump II the Trumpening.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#398

Post by konjin »

dragonwriter wrote: post #356
konjin wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Joe Biden wrote the original Patriot act. Lets not pretend that liberalism doesn't come with a jackboot on the neck of the people either.

> Joe Biden wrote the original Patriot act. No, he didn't. USA PATRIOT Act was from Rep. Sensenbrenner (R-WI). It incorporated material from 3 earlier bills, one of which was also by Rep. Sensenbrenner (R-WI), the others by Sen. Daschle (D-SD) and Rep. Oxley (R-OH). https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/3162...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnibus_Counterterrorism_Act_o...

I should have said draft instead of original.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#399

Post by SuoDuanDao »

dragonwriter wrote: post #136
teraku wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it's feudalism

> Yes, it's feudalism Its really, really not feudalism, which is highly de -centralized.

Walled gardens (read fiefdoms) run by megacorporations is decentralised, I don't have to accept Alphabet's TOS if I don't want to. They just have so many people who do want to that they can dictate pretty crazy terms.

Governments asking favours of these corporate lords looks centralised and makes us pay attention, but it requires their consent to get anywhere.

Re: ‘Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies

#400

Post by mr_toad »

Der_Einzige wrote: post #256
busterarm wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, we should have never given those poors access to say whatever is on their minds, right? At least not in front of other people... It'll be the end of civilization. Everyone should agree with the rich and powerful.

Isn't that basically what the Allegory of the cave is advocating for? If you are uneducated (and almost certainly poor), you do not see reality for how it is, but instead you see shadows against the wall. Only through the process of a dialectical education can you begin to see reality for how it is. As a result, only the educated enlightened individuals should become kings or the guardians of a state. Any system whic…

I think it would be more sensible to fix the education system than to appoint uneducated people to government positions just to increase the representation of poorer people.
Post reply on HN