Sci-Hub Is Now on the ‘Uncensorable Web’

Post by woodrowbarlow » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 1:23 PM UTC

aufhebung wrote: post #379

woodrowbarlow wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm not aware of any ISPs that have taken that step in the US, but since the 2017 repeal it is now a legal business strategy. it has happened in portugal (although that's irrelevant to US law) -- customers get a base package and need to pay extra for the "social media package" (which unlocks twitter and facebook) or the "streaming package" (which unlocks netflix, youtube, etc.) (this is on top of the subscription fee…

>customers get a base package and need to pay extra for the "social media package" (which unlocks twitter and facebook) or the "streaming package" (which unlocks netflix, youtube, etc.) According to snopes this doesn't seem to be fully accurate. There was a mobile plan with which you could buy extra data for different services (which I admit is not ideal), but no extra package to "unlock" services.

Post by toxik » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 2:12 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #333

toxik wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was not being snarky, I pointed out that the argument was made about a statement that was never made.

It's fine to point that out, but the way you did it lands with me as snarky. There's a spectrum of how readers interpret such things (some would find it snarky, as I did, while others wouldn't)—but what's for certain is that commenters tend to underestimate the impact of what they post by 10x or more. (Objects in the mirror are closer than they appear.) Since you only have to hit a small section of that spectrum to s…

Post by woodrowbarlow » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 5:19 PM UTC

woodrowbarlow wrote: post #402

skynet-9000 wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This proves the point. It is legal, but no one even offered such a package.

if you say so. i think they're waiting to see whether the new administration will overturn. in any case, the main point is about ISPs creating profitable incentive for themselves to keep infrastructure under-developed by making the internet a pay-to-play arena.

Post by alentist » Wed, Jan 13, 2021, 8:16 PM UTC

ajkjk wrote: post #386

alentist wrote: post #380

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> uh... so? Don't play coy. Punching someone is not the same thing as "showing them the door".

I feel like you're trying to trick me into admitting I'd punch them, or something, which isn't necessary and is kinda weird. I would definitely want to punch someone who was saying nazi stuff around me. Who wouldn't? Of course, yeah, 'showing them the door' is the more dignified response, so that probably comes first. As does talking about it and trying to figure out why they persist in being awful.

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 14, 2021, 4:06 PM UTC

jquery wrote: post #337

ajkjk wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm, that fails to land as a criticism. Depends whether you're talking about (a) "free speech, the legally-protected institution" or (b) "free speech, your right to be awful and not suffer consequences". The xkcd is saying that people saying "but my free speech!" are defending (b) by describing it as (a), which it's not. That's basically true. Afaik the part xkcd definitely gets wrong is the part about "can't arrest y…

> Everyone's on board with free speech as a concept here No they aren’t, including you. I don’t trust your judgement of who is a Nazi, and even if I did, I especially don’t trust everyone who hears you say that. However, despite your endorsement of political violence (terrorism) I don’t believe that it would be right for you to be deplatformed, especially if it’s breach of contract (like what AWS is doing). Nor would…