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

611–620 of 645 posts

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

#611

Post by somesortofsystm »

s5300 wrote: post #547
somesortofsystm wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Have you ever considered that what you're posting/discussing may not be found to follow the posting guidelines of this forum by some majority of it's users and they're simply trying to tell you that by using the built in feature to do so? If you haven't in a bit, please re-read the guidelines.

I've read the guidelines, but I'm pretty sure that American warfighting is relevant to HN.

Especially apropos the info-/bigdata- sphere.

But okay, lets forget the subject and never mention it again.

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

#612

Post by tootie »

raxxorrax wrote: post #603
tootie wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Snowden had nothing to do with censorship. I haven't seen a credible accusation of internet censorship against the government in recent memory. Private companies can refuse to serve certain customers. And obviously there's copyright law and government secrecy laws. But no personal expression is banned.

Mass surveillance induces censorship and has a chilling effect on speech, so it is arguably true that security agencies violated the constitution they are sworn to protect.

Strong disagree. The potential damage done by mass surveillance would be against private communication, not public. Intelligence agencies can and do gather a lot of intelligence by just observing publicly-shared information. And considering the surveillance excesses observed since the war on terror has unfolded, there has been no discernible decrease in speech freedom nor has anyone ever been provably prosecuted or persecuted due to data wrongly collected in one of these programs.

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

#613

Post by muyuu »

mzsmyk wrote: post #597
muyuu wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so maybe it worked flawlessly?

Or it didn’t happen at all

yep, both are possible from GP's assessment, but they claim to have evidence in the original study

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

#614

Post by dang »

cryptica wrote: post #514
snazz wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Politics is generally off-topic here other than in a few specific posts that are explicitly allowed because they're so newsworthy, like the death of RBG and the media calling the election.

I think the fact that politics can't be discussed here is itself a form of censorship. Because people are not able to freely exchange ideas about politics, you end up with silos. The main reason why the subject of politics causes flame wars is because people are thinking about it emotionally because they have very little actual information to work with. The less sharing of information there is on the subject, the mor…

It's not the case that politics can't be discussed here. Many HN stories have political overlap. At the same time, we can't allow all political posts and we have to moderate flamewars, or HN will turn into a political site, which is against its mandate (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html).

I've written about this many times: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so.... These explanations have become pretty stable by now, so I think they answer the question pretty completely. Some good threads to start with might be https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21607844 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22902396.

If anyone has a better idea about how we should approach this, I'd love to hear it. But please make sure that you've familiarized yourself with the previous explanations first and understand the constraints we're subject to. If it's something simple like "just ban politics" or "just allow everything", I've already answered many times why that won't work.

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

#615

Post by tboyd47 »

MeinBlutIstBlau wrote: post #228
tboyd47 wrote: post #114

It is not surprising that this would happen in a democratic state. Democracy is not necessarily friendly to individual rights and freedoms. If the majority of citizens want to take your freedom away, you have no recourse in a democratic society. What we recognize as freedoms and human rights are more appropriately associated with limited government, separation of powers, and republics. We often associate democracies…

Do you have a source of what specific stuff you're referring to? I want to read more and learn about some of that cause with sounds interesting to look at the US in that light.

You could try browsing content from Mises Institute or Cato Institute.

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

#616

Post by r00fus »

war1025 wrote: post #97
r00fus wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the article: > "Poland blocked human rights sites; India same-sex dating sites" Clearly that's the wheelhouse of the right-leaning national groups, right? Oh, maybe not. Or maybe it's the rightwing nationalist governments cracking down on disadvantaged groups?

I admit I didn't read the article before commenting. Really just seems like anyone that can get away with it is censoring people with differing opinions. Seems like something that will surely end well /s

Amusing how when it's aligned with your viewpoints (suppression of speech for rightwing groups), it's partisan. Otherwise, it's "anyone can get away with it".

Hypocrisy on display

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

#617

Post by vinni2 »

birktj wrote: post #331
na85 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I don’t know where else to look. Does Norway not publish its corpus of law online? Even in Canada where our government motto is "yesterday's technology today" we have websites where you can look up all legislation and read it.

It does, they even have a selection that is translated to english [1]. However I don't know what kind of terms I would search for. I tried "DNS", but it didn't give me anything. I also tried "internet blocking", no luck there either. [1]: https://lovdata.no/register/loverEngelsk

Exactly same thing I mentioned. It is so hard to search and explore these laws.

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

#618

Post by war1025 »

r00fus wrote: post #616
war1025 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I admit I didn't read the article before commenting. Really just seems like anyone that can get away with it is censoring people with differing opinions. Seems like something that will surely end well /s

Amusing how when it's aligned with your viewpoints (suppression of speech for rightwing groups), it's partisan. Otherwise, it's "anyone can get away with it". Hypocrisy on display

You misread my comment, which fair enough the wording wasn't great.

What I actually said is "anyone who can get away with it"

And obviously they would be doing it for partisan reasons.

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

#619

Post by MeinBlutIstBlau »

seppin wrote: post #330
MeinBlutIstBlau wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disinformation assumes the average person is stupid though. Whose to say the inherent undisputable (because you can't prove or deny) conspiracy theory someone believes is true? Why is the onus on media companies to police how we want to live our lives and believe in whatever nonsense we want to? I play videogames and watch tv shows, because it inspires me to think a particular way outside of the norm, should it be ba…

You dont have to be stupid to fall for disinformation, you just have to want to believe a lie. A lot of people are ok with lies if they confirm what they already believe.

Yes but those types of people are not looking for truth, they're looking for information that supports their bias. So if you tell them to shut up and take it, now they internally fabricate a conspiracy theory. What's worse is you have no idea what they're thinking or planning now.

The only people who care about "truth" in capitalism are shareholders and affluent individuals. It binds them to the culture and when a bunch of lowlifes and poorer people tell them "fuck off" essentially, they get pissy and upset that the people don't like the status quo.

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

#620

Post by tptacek »

busterarm wrote: post #589
tptacek wrote: post #488

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can watch the Eldon Edwards video right now, with a single Google search, to see how untrue it is that the KKK had in 1957 anything resembling the access to the discourse they have today.

If you think the KKK is stronger today than in the 1950s, then you are so ludicrously out of touch that I can't continue this conversation. They might be able to access more people in raw numbers but we also have a lot more people in raw numbers on the planet. Percentage wise they're insignificant, with virtually all of the country not willing to listen to their bullshit. As someone from the security industry, you sh…

Yeah, you missed my point. In fairness, I didn't make it super clear for you.
Post reply on HN