Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky • Hacker News Board

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#571

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:34 PM UTC

sweeter wrote: post #428

bad_user wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to human rights, unfortunately, the notion got perverted by USSR and its allies. The difference between the US and the rest of the world is that the US has the First Amendment, which it upholds. So, for example, in the US "hate speech" is not banned, and while inciting violence is banned, it must be literal incitement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United_Stat... This is important, be…

theres no absolute free speech in the US. There are most certainly plenty of things you cannot say and protestors are often violently silenced by police and riot squads. Then the media upholds its end of the bargain by heavily re-enforcing the State Dept. position while besmirching the message of the protestors and misrepresenting them in any and every way imaginable. You can say a lot of awful shit, but you really c…

[deleted]

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#572

Post by bad_user » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:36 PM UTC

sweeter wrote: post #428

bad_user wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to human rights, unfortunately, the notion got perverted by USSR and its allies. The difference between the US and the rest of the world is that the US has the First Amendment, which it upholds. So, for example, in the US "hate speech" is not banned, and while inciting violence is banned, it must be literal incitement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United_Stat... This is important, be…

theres no absolute free speech in the US. There are most certainly plenty of things you cannot say and protestors are often violently silenced by police and riot squads. Then the media upholds its end of the bargain by heavily re-enforcing the State Dept. position while besmirching the message of the protestors and misrepresenting them in any and every way imaginable. You can say a lot of awful shit, but you really c…

[flagged]

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#573

Post by jajko » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:40 PM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #554

torginus wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really effing hate the idea that competition is created not because people with entrepreneurial spirit think they can do what SpaceX does cheaper and better, but because the guy running the show is politically undesirable and untrustworthy.

But that's not the issue: the issue is that Musk alienated almost the entire core demographic who wanted to buy Tesla's, wanted to support electric cars and were more or less completely primed to freely promote the entire brand. He is a man who owns an electric car company but has been pushing climate change denialism as his political position and supporting politicians who do. There's competition because Tesla is no…

Just a single man representing single family in Switzerland but you are right - I'll never buy anything from Tesla, couldn't care less if they are best or not (no they are not in 2024, novelty wore off some time ago with tons of competition, at least in Europe).

He showed his true colors, there is no correction possible, people just don't rewrite their core personality. Support for puttin' and overall war in Ukraine, support for dictators, very bad stance on many societal topics, treats his employees like slaves, proper piece of shit as a parent, utterly childish reactions of an immature boy rather than Man - we haven't seen the worst yet.

Brilliance in some aspects means nothing if its dragged down into mud by rest of personality. I know some still worship him for the positives and ignore or even appreciate the rest, I can't and won't.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#574

Post by TacticalCoder » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:40 PM UTC

kstenerud wrote: post #421

kstenerud wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's partisan/political because Musk is partisan/political. And it's not just Musk. We've been living in a fantasy land of "no political affiliation" in the tech world for decades, and now that the age of the hyper-rich has come once again, they are realizing the benefits of using the power they wield to shape the worlds they live in. So now in the early stages of this century's great fight, we'll see our beloved tec…

Looking at the responses, I can see that people are still viewing this through the limited lens of left vs right. This is of course a thing in that nobody can hide their colors anymore, but I'm specifically talking about the rich now feeling empowered enough that they even have the hubris to challenge governments of the world for their own benefit, and in some cases even build their own empires to escape the limitati…

You got to be kidding me... Prospera / Honduras is nothing. It doesn't register. Libertarians, sadly I'd add, shall never ever have an ounce of success: all the powers that be in this world are out there to crush liberties, everywhere, worldwide.

Meanwhile The New York Times is titling an article: "The constitution is scared, but is it dangerous?"

There's nothing more belonging to the rich than the mainstream media, including the NYT. They were the people selling you the FTX scam and explaining you SBF was the second coming of Christ.

Now that Harris wants to "force congress to ban guns in her 100 days, or take executive orders if congress doesn't do it", of course that the NYT is publishing about the constitution being potentially dangerous.

And the problem is... Prospera in Honduras?

As long as you keep reading The NYT, you're fighting the wrong enemy.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#575

Post by lolinder » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:40 PM UTC

wkat4242 wrote: post #395

kstenerud wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's partisan/political because Musk is partisan/political. And it's not just Musk. We've been living in a fantasy land of "no political affiliation" in the tech world for decades, and now that the age of the hyper-rich has come once again, they are realizing the benefits of using the power they wield to shape the worlds they live in. So now in the early stages of this century's great fight, we'll see our beloved tec…

To be honest with the current polarisation levels in politics it's no longer possible to be neutral. The conservative side is now even strongarming companies into abandoning their diversity programs! This is just really not ok, I'm part of the LGBTIQ+ support network in our company and this kind of thing is really making waves. People are worried, even though we're a Europe based company where this is not a contested…

Hi! I'm neutral.

DEI was a political statement—one that you agreed with and felt was necessary. Abandoning DEI is also a political statement—one that you disagree with and think is not okay.

You're welcome to disagree with the people who disagree with DEI, but I'd hesitate to claim that these companies were "strongarmed" into it—the programs always existed as a political tool for the company to curry favor, not as something that was added for its intrinsic practical or moral value. The political climate has changed, which means they no longer serve their true purpose.

The important takeaway from this reversal is that the progressive theory of change that's been leaned on for the past few decades was a bad one. We thought that a lot of progress had been made, but it turns out it was all surface level and easy to undo when the pressure to keep up appearances went away or reversed. "We need to do this because it will look bad if we don't" is a very fickle tool for motivating real change.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#576

Post by torginus » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:43 PM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #554

torginus wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really effing hate the idea that competition is created not because people with entrepreneurial spirit think they can do what SpaceX does cheaper and better, but because the guy running the show is politically undesirable and untrustworthy.

But that's not the issue: the issue is that Musk alienated almost the entire core demographic who wanted to buy Tesla's, wanted to support electric cars and were more or less completely primed to freely promote the entire brand. He is a man who owns an electric car company but has been pushing climate change denialism as his political position and supporting politicians who do. There's competition because Tesla is no…

Tbh, not sure what percentage of Tesla buyers are ideologically motivated, but having tried a couple electric cars, I still believe the Model 3 is the best EV outside the premium segment, period.

As for Musk, he's a weird one for sure. He made me realize that I don't know the politics of most CEOs (or even know who they are). Which is just as well, I don't want to ponder in the supermarket whether my bodywash is ideologically consistent with my shampoo.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#577

Post by numpad0 » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:44 PM UTC

jazzyjackson wrote: post #311

numpad0 wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bluesky's whole moderation and decentralization setups were only devised, or at least implemented, after it blew up in Japan and bunch of Japanese artists immediately started hammering the platform with novel content they consider to be lawful and more kosher than normal but were officially felt platform threatening to their team. So, not to undermine efforts from Bluesky team - I applaud their SoTA attempt at microb…

I can only imagine what this refers to but after googling for a few minutes for "bluesky japan controversy" I'm just going to let this exchange color my impression of what's going on at bluesky: > Deleted Post >> Katie Tightpussy: BLACKTHORNE: We are a moderation service for Bluesky with the goal of improving social media for progressive queer folks and leftists who wholeheartedly enjoy Japanese anime, manga, games,…

yeaaaahhh, it can't get more appropriate than to frame this problem with an image of an angry short ethnic woman in front of a tall white male guardian, right... and it's totally fine that no one in said ethnicity interacts with that post over there, right...? At that point you might as well include topics like mercury content in Asian seaweeds and arsenic in rice... duh.

The reason why you aren't finding anything specific to Bluesky is because it's not a Bluesky specific problem. Every social media that goes big in Japan will have this Japanese pedo flood problem, if you prefer it expressed in that kind of vocabularies. Social media that do not experience this stays irrelevant in Japan, for better or worse(frankly said likely better for profitability).

It happens as a spontaneous flood of 50:50 mix tangentially labeled pedo:nonpedo mixed content stream consuming non-negligible bandwidth, increasing in volume exponentially until Japanese fraction reaches steady state of >50% by content, ~30% by user count, and >50% of top popular accounts. The mixture and fraction metrics show indefinite steady up trend.

Gargron, the Mastodon author and benevolent dictator of the Fediverse, famously gave up and went on to basically race filter Japanese from the European half of the system, which by the way I have no choice but to fully respect given his circumstances, options available, and value to be recovered. Twitter famously deleted trust and safety team, and according to Elon Musk himself with his tongue in cheek, Twitter usage in Japan is "growing", amid its worsening Indo-Arabic spam problem and tanking global popularity. Even literal pornography websites like PornHub had this exact problem, in whose case they were forced to nuke the website to get rid of so-called JAVs using unverified CP as an excuse(lots of JAVs feature easily CP frameable females). And Bluesky created the whole moderation framework and default enforced implementation in response to it.

Anyway, what I'm saying is just, only, Bluesky's whole moderation framework is a post hoc solution to this problem, so while strong resistance against oppressive evil radical totalitarian governments sure is considered as one of ultimate goals, it's definitely not the goal in their initial problem definition.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#578

Post by kshri24 » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:46 PM UTC

janalsncm wrote: post #533

kshri24 wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh so it is now "wise" to "keep mouth shut". No wonder the West is so screwed. It has a lot of "wise men". Very few, like Elon, who will put their money where their mouth is. What you consider "wise", in this context at least, is basically to just put your head down, accept the diktats of authority, entertain the crazed loonies in society and it is all sunshine and rainbows!

If you don’t have anything intelligent to say, yes, nothing is usually best. > accept the diktats of authority Is this not what Musk is doing in China? Does he not believe the Chinese have a right to free speech? If he actually cared, he would speak out about it. The fact that he’s choosing Chinese money over human rights, you might say that hurts the West.

> Is this not what Musk is doing in China? Does he not believe the Chinese have a right to free speech? If he actually cared, he would speak out about it. The fact that he’s choosing Chinese money over human rights, you might say that hurts the West.

China has a unilateral ban on all non-Chinese apps. Not just Twitter/X. They have the Great Firewall for a reason. Now for Musk to accept "diktats of authority", X should have been operating in China in the first place. It is not since 2009 at least. Whereas X was operating in Brazil until few days ago.

> If he actually cared, he would speak out about it. The fact that he’s choosing Chinese money over human rights

When he did he got reprimanded by the Chinese CCP. He did not give a fuck [1].

> you might say that hurts the West

The West does more trade with China than with any other country. And yes it does hurt the West considering it is so dependent on China for everything including medicines! And a lot of that has to do with "wise men" in politics who decided it was cool to establish trade relations with a Dictatorship in the 1970s and ensured that the entire World's supply chain relied on said Dictatorship. If not for these "wise men", none of us would have been dependent on China in the first place.

[1]: https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/28/chinas-ccp-warns-elon-musk-a...

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#579

Post by jajko » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:47 PM UTC

blueredmodern wrote: post #453

crossroadsguy wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Musk stuck to what he's good at Right. And that is?

[flagged]

He was able to find or buy people and companies smart and capable enough to deliver this for him, and he was often, but not always smart enough to listen to them (ie tesla autopilot fiasco - example of an ego playing with him). He was so successful with spacex because nobody really dared/bothered to enter that space and existing companies had 0 pressure to deliver better but that's more of government fail. He personally didn't come up with any of those impressive feats like electric cars of vertical rocket landings, thats a ridiculous proposition when all he is is a competent manager.

Now he is slowly rolling back some of those hard won achievements, and competition catching up and/or overtaking in many others.

Re: Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

#580

Post by thimabi » Sun, Sep 01, 2024, 12:47 PM UTC

braunjohnson wrote: post #53

I remain surprised at how casually people will step over the free speech dead body so they can hate on people the media at large has maligned. Regardless of what you think of Musk, where's your outrage over this blatant authoritarianism?

There is little authoritarianism in the decision to block access to X. Brazilian law, properly drafted and passed by two independent legislative chambers, dictates several important things:

- foreign companies that operate in Brazil must have a representative there.

- all constitutional rights are to be equally protected, meaning that there are no absolute rights, such as freedom of speech.

- websites have to comply with Brazilian regulations and judicial orders, including removing content that has been deemed illegal by the judiciary.

- the blocking of a non-compliant website is explicitly listed as a penalty under the law.

Right now, Brazil’s Supreme Court is made up of judges appointed by various presidents, and there are tons of members of the opposition in Parliament. Anything that the Court does is subject to these checks and balances, and eventual abuses, such as “banning VPNs”, are quickly overturned in most cases.

At the moment, the only thing that Musk might rightfully challenge in court is the blocking of Starlink’s assets — as there is clear dissent about the legality of this measure. In terms of content moderation and blocking, the letter and spirit of the law are being properly followed.