101–110 of 245 posts
I am more disturbed by the fact that the infrastructure was already in place to instantly block Telegram as soon as a judge ordered it.
Hm? Every ISP is able to block websites. This happens constantly, specially with piracy-related websites.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are correct. Brazilian had a CIA backed dictatorship during cold War, and when it ended people made sure to make a constitution that would prevent another one. Sadly the constitution is being ignored for a while now, the current government is strongly against free speech, the previous government also had issues. Meanwhile the Supreme Court are the ones that really hate the constitution, for example a guy was arre…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Durov don't operate from Russia and wasn't operating during those "blockings", so this theory does not hold up.
Durov operates from the UAE which is a strong ally of Russia (despite them spending a lot of money to convince people otherwise). It's not like he emigrated to Europe or something.
Lots of Russians in the UAE, including running away from Putin's folly/conscription.
Doesn't this sound like a dictatorship?
The word "dictatorship" doesn't actually mean anything. Its sole purpose is to attack certain institutions and/or governments, while excluding other institutions and governments from criticism even though they share most or all of the same characteristics. Instead of asking whether or not XYZ is a dictatorship, ask "are they following their own laws and constitution?", "are they respecting universal human rights?", a…
Of course it does, you can quantify the degree to which a country is authoritarian even if it has nominally democratic institutions like North Korea or Iraq under the Ba'ath party. To be sure, the word is bandied about a lot in political discourse as in the comment you replied to, but it is well-defined.
This has happened several times before with other services: https://bloqueios.info/en/timeline/ Unfortunately this site hasn't been updated since 2016, but I don't think that's because these kinds of orders have stopped being issued. They've previously been issued on various occasions by a state judge when a company either ignores or says it can't technically comply with a subpoena or injunction in a court case, and…
This time the DNS block was ordered directly by a supreme court judge. No one can overturn that. Also, the political scenario was different. Brazil used to at least pretend to be a democracy with a constitution and rule of law. Since then, these supreme court judges have done far worse than block some messaging service. This is literally nothing to people like them.
What do you mean? Didn't they have an election that the incumbent lost (for very good reasons I might add, anyone who bungles the Covid response that bad doesn't deserve to remain in power regardless of anything else (and there was a lot of "else")) recently, implying democracy and all that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't, really. It's specifically because Telegram failed to deliver all the requested information on certain nazi propaganda spreader groups.
Who defined nazi propaganda spreader groups? Who draws the line? First Nazi propaganda spreaders, then gay rights activists? Sounds extremely dangerous to have this kind of centralized control.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't, really. It's specifically because Telegram failed to deliver all the requested information on certain nazi propaganda spreader groups.
Who defined nazi propaganda spreader groups? Who draws the line? First Nazi propaganda spreaders, then gay rights activists? Sounds extremely dangerous to have this kind of centralized control.
Assuming good faith, most developed countries have hate (and similar) speech laws, with Nazism being explicitly banned in most (all? maybe Spain/Portugal/Switzerland are exceptions) of Europe. Same goes for antisemitism, or in general racial/religious hatred/discrimination to various extents. It's not a slippery slope "oh what will they ban next", it's "this kind of thing has proven itself to be extremely dangerous and is detrimental to everyone, hence it's banned". And it has been for decades, and nobody has just added gay activists, including in very anti-LGBTQ countries like Poland.
You might also want to look up the paradox of tolerance, it's a fun read.
No company should think it's above the national laws
You and JP Barlow's Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace can have words. There's 195 nations on this planet. Should every company lower themselves below every nation? Without question? There's far more provinces with some lawmaking capability. How logistically do we even begin to figure out how to obey each & every single local rule? These nations are on the internet. It's an unplace to connect all places. If yo…
If your area has stupid beef, it's on you to handle your shit & make it so
Yeah yeah, nothing is ever our problem, it's always someone else's problem and other people's problems are stupid. Do you not realize how head-up-the-ass that sounds? A lot of regular people hate techies because they celebrate disruption and software 'eating the world' (including many people's livelihood and communities) while shrugging off any kind of collective responsibility.
What about when some group of people have legitimate beef?