41–50 of 140 posts
I agree with Turkey's position here.
I agree with Turkey's position here.
History for the curious reader: The law passed months ago and all major providers are given notice last year. Any social media provider, local or foreign, with at least 1M daily user activity is required to assign a legal representative in Turkey now. Internet bandwith of non-obliging companies will be reduced up to 95% incrementally. Until recently, most social networks including Facebook were silent to this request…
Or, just some invented number, adjusted according to Erdoğan's political requirements?
this is going to happen to turkey too... people going full vpn, then govt banning vpn, then using shit like kazhakistan certificate thing and before you know it, full on china GFW.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not the same thing. As long as you don't cause violence or you're not violating the terms of service which you accepted while joining to the service, they wouldn't remove your content or block you. Of course, you can come up with one off examples of ML models screwing things up but it's not the intention while developing those models. Turkish government's intention here is getting content that criticise them rem…
>As long as you don't cause violence or you're not violating the terms of service which you accepted while joining to the service, they wouldn't remove your content or block you. That's both optimistic and naive given that TOS can change at any time, and interpretation aren't subject to appeal with a transparent process.
My point is there is no secret agenda to bring up a content that supports one view. What Turkish gov wants to achieve is that, taking down the content they don't like. They have taken over all mainstream TV channels and you wouldn't see a line of critic on any channel, if you do it's quite likely you will not be invited to debate next time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should be noted that the US has the same double standards, but enforced by silicon valley corps themselves in union. Moral of the story: Power currupts.
It's not the same thing. As long as you don't cause violence or you're not violating the terms of service which you accepted while joining to the service, they wouldn't remove your content or block you. Of course, you can come up with one off examples of ML models screwing things up but it's not the intention while developing those models. Turkish government's intention here is getting content that criticise them rem…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should be noted that the US has the same double standards, but enforced by silicon valley corps themselves in union. Moral of the story: Power currupts.
It's not the same thing. As long as you don't cause violence or you're not violating the terms of service which you accepted while joining to the service, they wouldn't remove your content or block you. Of course, you can come up with one off examples of ML models screwing things up but it's not the intention while developing those models. Turkish government's intention here is getting content that criticise them rem…
After all that happened, Now it makes sense for a country to have a grasp over the communication of its citizens. That’s said, the primary use is expected to be control of journalism on Youtube. After Erdogan took over almost all of the media, many of the fired journalists started Youtube channels and got more popular than the media Erdogan has a hold on. He now wants to impose the same controls that he has over TV c…
It should be noted that the US has the same double standards, but enforced by silicon valley corps themselves in union. Moral of the story: Power currupts.
If a company banned me from saying x, I can in theory go to another platform and say the same thing. Failing that, I can build my own site. There are a handful of things I can do to say x. Failing a digital platform, I can always go out on the street and say it. The police won't stop me.
If a government does the same, they have the power to prevent me from saying such a thing on all platforms, but worse, I can't even go out on the streets to say it, because I can get arrested. I could face maximum prison times, or worse, in some countries I could face the death penalty.
There is a huge difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> for a country to have a grasp over the communication of its citizens It's never the country that has this power. It's particular government bodies.
In Turkey AKP/Erdogan is the "country". The beef between twitter and Erdogan's AKP is quite old and goes back to at least the times of the coup, and then when the Turkish police got doxxed by CthulhuSec. edit: tone down my own opinion bc toyg is right in their critique
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should be noted that the US has the same double standards, but enforced by silicon valley corps themselves in union. Moral of the story: Power currupts.
It's not the same thing. As long as you don't cause violence or you're not violating the terms of service which you accepted while joining to the service, they wouldn't remove your content or block you. Of course, you can come up with one off examples of ML models screwing things up but it's not the intention while developing those models. Turkish government's intention here is getting content that criticise them rem…
The part with "in union" is not really explained by ML models. These de-platforming actions are done manually and apparently one-sided.
Just for fun you can look up why Trump was banned on Twitter and see Khamenei's worst tweets from months prior, that were still up a week ago or so (nevermind him being banned). You find tons of those examples.
Also the TOS does not matter.