An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021) • Hacker News Board

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#61

Post by anramon » Thu, Jan 25, 2024, 12:30 AM UTC

amadeuspagel wrote: post #13

Orwell wrote about subtle censorship in a preface to Animal Farm[1] -- the book itself is about totalitarian censorship in the Soviet Union, the preface is about a more subtle censorship in britain that made it hard to publish the book. [1]: https://www.orwellfoundation.com/the-orwell-foundation/orwel...

>the book itself is about totalitarian censorship in the Soviet Union

Animal farm is a critic of any kind of totalitarian government AND a critic of capitalism itself. The book literally ends with:

>Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#62

Post by pixl97 » Thu, Jan 25, 2024, 3:25 AM UTC

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #33

pixl97 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

But it's not. Why should you care what censorship is done in some other country? Shouldn't you care about your own? I don't care what Putin/Xi/... censors, but I care strongly about what our "garden" of europe, the bastion of freedom of EU censors. Or my own small country... the whole 'rest of the world' can access something, but I have to set up a complete DNS setup to avoid local ones (luckily the bans are DNS base…

>Why should you care what censorship is done in some other country

Because corporations cross national lines.

Just ask Apple and Jon Stewart about this. What China censors directly affects what media is produced in the US.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#63

Post by 331c8c71 » Thu, Jan 25, 2024, 5:47 AM UTC

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #52

331c8c71 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I don't know about Finns but in Western Europe Russians are often considered to be a bit too direct or even blunt. Kinda contradicts the "lying culture" hypothesis. EDIT. I watched the video a bit more and I could not take it seriously after seeing the part about "technological backwardness" that apparently always was there. That's just charged propaganda and there is nothing to discuss.

Not going to disagree that the person is coming from a certain bias but the information I'm referring to is factual about words that are understood by Russians. I don't consider that all Russians are part of a lying culture but there are words which Russians use to distinguish the nuances of lying, and even the nuances of telling truths; that says something about the messages they tend to hear.

In English one could also use different words for that:

- that's right/true/сorrect

- that's wrong/false/incorrect

Does this imply anything? The synonyms he talks about are very similar e.g. a noun from "right" and a noun from "true".

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#64

Post by SammyStacks » Thu, Jan 25, 2024, 3:32 PM UTC

hduueudna24 wrote: post #35

SammyStacks wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very irresponsible and dangerous comparison to make.

It is a weirdly telling that such a comment trying to enforce self-censorship shows up in a discussion of sacred cow in US.

There was no discussion. The poster stated a claim without providing any explanation or examples. That's the dangerous part. There absolutely should be a discussion, but neither you nor the original poster want to have one. You both wanted to make a one-sentence, circular argument to claim the moral high ground.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#65

Post by ajsnigrutin » Thu, Jan 25, 2024, 4:04 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #62

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not. Why should you care what censorship is done in some other country? Shouldn't you care about your own? I don't care what Putin/Xi/... censors, but I care strongly about what our "garden" of europe, the bastion of freedom of EU censors. Or my own small country... the whole 'rest of the world' can access something, but I have to set up a complete DNS setup to avoid local ones (luckily the bans are DNS base…

>Why should you care what censorship is done in some other country Because corporations cross national lines. Just ask Apple and Jon Stewart about this. What China censors directly affects what media is produced in the US.

Well sure, but again, that's your (i'm guessing you're american) companies doing the censorship. And you're talking about entertainment, while most people want other information (mostly "news") uncensored.

With access to only government-approved and censored media, then iraq has weapons of mass destruction, putin has only two days of missles left,... since mid-2022, jeffery eppstein killed himself, and only cnn can legally read hillarys emails on wikileaks, etc.

Re: An illustrated guide to post-Orwellian censorship (2021)

#66

Post by lcnPylGDnU4H9OF » Thu, Jan 25, 2024, 8:57 PM UTC

331c8c71 wrote: post #63

lcnPylGDnU4H9OF wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not going to disagree that the person is coming from a certain bias but the information I'm referring to is factual about words that are understood by Russians. I don't consider that all Russians are part of a lying culture but there are words which Russians use to distinguish the nuances of lying, and even the nuances of telling truths; that says something about the messages they tend to hear.

In English one could also use different words for that: - that's right/true/сorrect - that's wrong/false/incorrect Does this imply anything? The synonyms he talks about are very similar e.g. a noun from "right" and a noun from "true".

> The synonyms he talks about are very similar e.g. a noun from "right" and a noun from "true".

If that's the case, I see where you're coming from. I was interpreting the meaning as similar to differences between "lie" and "bullshit" and "gaslight" in English. They all mean roughly "an untrue statement" but they still have their own nuances; "bullshitting" and "gaslighting" are just specific ways of "speaking untruths".

> Does this imply anything?

This does not imply to me that people who understand these words are bad or evil or anything like that. It suggests, instead, that they're used to being lied to in subtle ways such that they've developed tools for discussing these lies amongst each other in their native language. Similar to how citizens of English-speaking nations use words like "bullshit" and "gaslight".