Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 855 posts

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

#761

Post by slater »

Hamuko wrote: post #476
threeseed wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The URLs are different (threads.net versus instagram.com). So pretty easy to tell in the analytics which site the user is on.

What about the app? As far as I know, Instagram users were getting Threads notifications inside the app.

The instagram app desperately wants me to post to threads, see all the fun stuff i'm missing on threads, and just join threads in general.

PS: Nice to see our resident mastodon hater (OP) is still at it, including the requisite smug "told-you-so"/"i totally predicted this!!~" link :D

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

#762

Post by fjkdlsjflkds »

fluoridation wrote: post #757
fjkdlsjflkds wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If he did that , it would be just as deplorable [...] No need for hypotheticals. He did do that (this is an easily-verifiable fact [1][2][3]). > [...] the censorship they were claiming to oppose. The thing is that this is clearly an empty claim, when Musk has no problems either complying with similar censoring orders from right-wing governments (Modi, Erdogan) or with arbitrarily censoring people for using medicall…

Regardless of Musk's motivations, would you rather he had complied with this latest request? In other words, would you rather there's more censorship in the world?

The world is not black and white... there are shades of grey. Sometimes censorship is lawful and/or justified, sometimes it is not.

I don't know if, in this case, it is justified or not, but it seems to be lawful (the same way that the censorship requests in India and Turkey were), as far as I can tell (I assume a judge of the Supreme Court knows a bit more about Brazilian law than you and me).

Given that Musk/Twitter seemingly has no problem complying with lawful censorship demands (or engaging in arbitrary censorship even without lawful censorship demands), it seems clear to me that Musk has no problem with "more censorship in the world". That was my only point.

My personal opinion on whether there is higher or lower need for censorship in the world is rather irrelevant (since I have no power or platforms to censor), but I certainly see no problem in actively censoring terrorists, bots, spammers and scammers (for example).

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

#763

Post by fluoridation »

chipdart wrote: post #49
Gud wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can’t be so naive that you think this has anything to do with the reasons you listed. The government in Brazil does not like X because users are critizing the government. Unfortunately Brazil is barely a democracy and it’s infested with little potentates.

> The government in Brazil does not like X because users are critizing the government. This baseless personal assertion does not pass the smell test. I'm going to explain to you why. Elon Musk's Twitter is happily censoring opposition of totalitarian dictatorships such as Turkey's Erdogan regime, and the only remark that Elon Musk published regarding censoring Turk opposition parties is that Elon Musk's Twitter would…

The statement you are replying to is "the government in Brazil does not like X because users are critizing the government." Why are you talking about what Musk did? What does one thing have to do with the other?

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

#764

Post by fluoridation »

fjkdlsjflkds wrote: post #762
fluoridation wrote: post #757

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regardless of Musk's motivations, would you rather he had complied with this latest request? In other words, would you rather there's more censorship in the world?

The world is not black and white... there are shades of grey. Sometimes censorship is lawful and/or justified, sometimes it is not. I don't know if, in this case, it is justified or not, but it seems to be lawful (the same way that the censorship requests in India and Turkey were), as far as I can tell (I assume a judge of the Supreme Court knows a bit more about Brazilian law than you and me). Given that Musk/Twitte…

It's not irrelevant to me, which why I'm asking. I'm asking if you would have preferred Musk to be consistent and ban those accounts instead. And if so, why? Do you agree with censorship if and only if it's legal (whatever that means in a particular jurisdiction)? Or is there some other reason?

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

#765

Post by throwadobe »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #740
throwadobe wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's happening in Pakistan has no bearing on what's happening in Brazil. Just because "twitter is banned" in both countries doesn't mean it was banned for the same reasons or that the ban applies in the same way.

[flagged]

[flagged]

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

#766

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

throwadobe wrote: post #643
Adrian_Ferreira wrote: post #287

I'm from Brazil and this judge is totally out of control. I agree that X needs to have a legal representative in Brazil, this is correct anywhere, but he threatened a fine of 200k and imprisonment to the person Musk appointed as representative if his stricture orders were not complied with. He threatened us to pay $9k in fines per day if we use VPN to access X. Unless you are part of the government base, it is diffic…

You can "be from Brazil" and still not understand the matter. Legal decisions are not a matter of "I agree" or "I disagree". They are a matter of law and facts. How exactly was the judge's decision here not in accordance with the law? I'm not "a part of the government base" and I happen to think this decision was lawful. Don't assume everyone who disagrees with you is doing so for political reasons. It would be too s…

[flagged]

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

#767

Post by mikrotikker »

dspillett wrote: post #642
bluescrn wrote: post #557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> His version of being a free speech absolutist is that people who agree with him should absolutely have the right to free speech. So he's merely an equal and opposite reaction to what the other tribe have been doing for ages? He didn't fundamentally change Twitter. He bought a powerful propaganda tool/weapon and aimed it in the opposite direction. (I suppose he's also using it as his own personal megaphone, whereas…

> So he's merely an equal and opposite reaction > He bought a powerful propaganda tool/weapon and aimed it in the opposite direction. I'd say not. I don't think twitter itself wasn't aimed directly in any direction before Musk, other than “away from where firing may cause twitter problems”. They operated from a position of cowardice rather than political bias. Sometimes this was towards the right because there was a…

You must have been on the good, non political side of Twitter. Or maybe you don't realize because you're weren't the target of Twitters unfair tactics

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

#768

Post by mikrotikker »

rixed wrote: post #473
mikrotikker wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech is all that matters. Musk is not perfect by any means here but he is better than the rest. He is exporting the 1st amendment to us nations who don't get to experience such freedoms. Which is what Twitter should have been doing, instead of kowtowing to the likes of the German and Saudi govts among others...

Not sure X posture against censure is to be taken seriously though. From Al Jazeera: > In India, he agreed with an order imposed by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to take down accounts and posts related to a farmers’ protest that swept through the country in February, their demands including guaranteed prices for their produce and debt waivers. ( https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/8/31/brazil-moves-to-blo... )

Not sure Al Jazeera is to be taken seriously.

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

#769

Post by throwadobe »

blackeyeblitzar wrote: post #766
throwadobe wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can "be from Brazil" and still not understand the matter. Legal decisions are not a matter of "I agree" or "I disagree". They are a matter of law and facts. How exactly was the judge's decision here not in accordance with the law? I'm not "a part of the government base" and I happen to think this decision was lawful. Don't assume everyone who disagrees with you is doing so for political reasons. It would be too s…

[flagged]

[flagged]

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

#770

Post by slowhadoken »

threeseed wrote: post #342
slowhadoken wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow sounds totalitarian. Maybe it’s for the best that Musk disassociates with Brazil.

The foundation of any society are rules. So unless you think every society is totalitarian your point makes no sense.

Someone from Brazil is saying they have a dictatorship right now so I guess it’s more complicated than that.
Post reply on HN