591–600 of 600 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
…so do nothing and forget about them in other words?
Exactly. "God will save". Inshallah Tayipp will find himself hiding from 10 million furious Turks storming his 1,000 bedroom palace by the end of the week. It's time for this criminal go to jail or flee to moscow.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't agree that speech is not a force unless it makes a threat. Think about what makes you consider "threatening speech" a "force": presumably it has nothing to do with particle physics... is it perhaps that the act of speech itself causes people to adopt behaviours they wouldn't normally adopt? ie.: that it can carry some coercive weight? That it can be used to exploit/endanger vulnerable people in some circumsta…
I don’t consider threatening speech a force, I’m opposed to it because it threatens force. You can argue that’s an exception to my principle but it’s not far out of line. I don’t try to ban other forms of speech, however much they hurt your feelings, because they don’t threaten force.
Almost all "contemporary reasonable censorship in functioning liberal democracies" are attempts to prevent people from exploiting the vulnerability of others: speech that causes people to make *patently insane and irrational* medical decisions, for example. Really stupid things like fake cancer cures, and suggestions to drink bleach. And typically, for proponents of censorship, there is a whole spectrum of acceptability as well: the more it's a grey zone, the less the censorship is acceptable. When the censorship clearly and obviously only constrains the actions of malicious actors, and clearly and obviously protects vulnerable people, it's seen as a win. This is always highly contextual, and limited by the extent of scientific knowledge.
A common theme is that censorship to protect those in power (the government) is bad, and censorship to protect those who have the least amount of power is... well, not great (it's definitely always better if it's not needed), but not bad in the same way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t consider threatening speech a force, I’m opposed to it because it threatens force. You can argue that’s an exception to my principle but it’s not far out of line. I don’t try to ban other forms of speech, however much they hurt your feelings, because they don’t threaten force.
Hurting feelings is unfortunate, but generally not considered to be a reason to suppress other people's speech: we rather choose to suppress our own speech when we think it might hurt other people, and choose to do so freely. Almost all "contemporary reasonable censorship in functioning liberal democracies" are attempts to prevent people from exploiting the vulnerability of others: speech that causes people to make *…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
IIRC a quarter of all active smartphones are iPhones globally. I'm not in the US, lots and lots of iPhones in circulation here. Also, no Briar on nearly all of those Androids, so they're just as reachable as iPhones.
The APK can be fetched from FDroid and be shared over Bluetooth sharing. On iPhones, sorry, but Europe it's basically Androidlandia.
And people are supposed to just figure that out while under rubble?
> Europe it's basically Androidlandia.
Only Eastern Europe. Western Europe (incl Germany) and the Nordics have between 30-60% iPhones. [0] Also Albania, for some reason.
That's also pretty much the browser distribution you get when looking at analytics data from various European countries, and it matches what I see people use here (Germany).
0: https://mezha.media/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/iPhone_Europe...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think it will actually harm Erdogan's support though, anger over blocking twitter?
Is his popular support relevant when he has his hands on the levers of government operations?
> A furor is building among some survivors over the government’s handling of the crisis. “I have been voting for this government for 20 years, and I’m telling everyone about my anger,” said one. “I will never forgive them.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/11/world/europe/earthquake-t...
Turkey should not be considered a democracy anymore, that's the sad reality. A country becoming a de factor dictatorship should not stay in NATO.
That's fine. Turks will depose him soon. As for NATO, Turkey leaving NATO only helps Russian sphere of influence and any anti-dictatorship person would be against that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The APK can be fetched from FDroid and be shared over Bluetooth sharing. On iPhones, sorry, but Europe it's basically Androidlandia.
> The APK can be fetched from FDroid and be shared over Bluetooth sharing. And people are supposed to just figure that out while under rubble? > Europe it's basically Androidlandia. Only Eastern Europe. Western Europe (incl Germany) and the Nordics have between 30-60% iPhones. [0] Also Albania, for some reason. That's also pretty much the browser distribution you get when looking at analytics data from various Europe…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a very subjective judgement and everyone is entitled his or her own opinion. But that one is very biased. As far as elections concerned Turkish election system is very solid as a process and implementation is solid. In the end Erdogan lost Istanbul in the last elections even after that election repeated for only Istanbul, and worse for Erdogan, the second round was much more decisive. People didn't like the elec…
To give everyone an idea of how solid the process is: consider that the opposition candidate widely considered most capable of beating the incumbent president was recently sentenced to two years in jail and removed from politics on the weakest of pretenses: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Ekrem_%C4%B0mamo%C4... Here are a few other biased sources offering their subjective judgements: - https://freedomhouse.o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is not to say that Turkey is full autocracy: the incubent president has a genuinely large amount of support and it's quite possible they would win a free and fair election. This is kind of skewed though, if people can't go on TV or Twitter and say "Erdogan doesn't know what he's doing and his policies are foolish". This is really the modern autocrat's secret weapon: have reasonably(-ish) fair(-ish) elections,…
> This is really the modern autocrat's secret weapon Hardly: Mussolini also had some sort of elections. It just happened that parliamentarians who were too much of a nuisance had unfortunate encounters with groups of hard batons, or were required to live on remote islands. In Putin's Russia they fall from balconies.
