How can they claim defamation when the original sentence said "(ANI has) been accused of...?" The bar of truth for that statement is absurdly low.
Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
71–80 of 506 posts
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of Wikipedia would likely be banned which, I assume, they want to avoid.
Yet another need for alternative, private internet connections. Authoritarianism should be acutely subverted.
The only way in which this could be possible, if not via VPNs, is via everyone have direct satellite internet, which is a bit difficult without good line of sight. It would also require an independent means of payment like layer II of bitcoin.
The better answer would be one where the ISPs don't have any ability to block websites. Web3 technologies could make it possible.
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#73I wonder what would be an effective countermeasure against stuff like this. Maybe we need a write-only global database and somehow separate the hosting/publisher from the organization that certifies it. Imagine if they simply sign an archive which is distributed over IPFS or some other distributed system. It would become impossible to take down content and as such impossible to comply with any blocking orders. They c…
> I wonder what would be an effective countermeasure against stuff like this. Good, trustworthy governance. I think its childish to try and make an ungovernable internet. Nobody actually wants to live in an ungovernable world. We want fraudulent credit card charges to be reversable. We want the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook to be able to get alex jones to shut up. I don't think pushing further to make the law…
>Good, trustworthy governance.
This example shows that you can't just shut off free speech to a few rogue nations, because states 'incompatible with liberal democracy' include the majority of the world's population. As we see, they hold enough influence to assert their censorship on all of us, regardless of where we are.
What hypothetical 'trustworthy governance' would be less susceptible to India's influence than WMF is in this case?
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#74Time to sit back and wait for the Streisand effect [0] to kick in... When will they learn that trying to hide things from the Internet is never that simple (as evidenced by the already-posted archive links)? [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect
[deleted]
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#75This article might be more informative although I can't say how accurate it is: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/wikipedia-suspends-ac...
Some context that is essentially personal opinion, take it for what it's worth:
It's not that ANI is an absolutely non-partisan and an objective outlet. They do lean pro-government, but the yardstick being applied here is not consistent at all. No Indian news outlet is great by that yardstick, but one is being called an absolute sham, and those who consistently take anti-establishment stances, often without merit, barely get a footnote.
Now you could argue that Wikipedia is volunteer-driven, and you could submit an edit, but it is hard. During the farmers' protests ~3 years ago, articles were worded in a manner that led one to believe that deaths by natural causes among the protestors were somehow caused by the protests. I just checked the article as I was writing this response, and there is still a detailed section titled "fatalities" that mostly documents deaths from natural causes. I tried sending in edits for some of this back in the day but faced an uphill battle against other contributors and gave up because I had a day job to get to.
None of this justifies a page being blocked, especially outside Indian jurisdiction, but it would be unwise to ignore the broader context about the website being an ideological battleground and not being able to pull off the right balance.
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think that the Indian court has legitimacy to block the article to be displayed worldwide. It has no jurisdicition for the citizens of all other countries and also no jurisdiction against content that is not hosted in India. But I guess that it was maybe more convenient for the wikimedia foundation to do it like that instead of doing geofencing that they might not have?
You want operate in country X, you must comply with country X laws or be ready to be percecuted. (From notice, to confiscation of servers, to executions; depends on the X and how inconvenient you are)
More broadly, if country X has the capacity to enforce its rulings against you, it is risky to assume that they do not apply to you, irrespective of what you think should be the case base on how you operate, where you are located, your citizenship, etc.
Many states have a wide variety of provisions applying national law in ways that might be contrary to all kinds of naive assumptions about how their jurisdiction should be limited
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I wonder what would be an effective countermeasure against stuff like this. Good, trustworthy governance. I think its childish to try and make an ungovernable internet. Nobody actually wants to live in an ungovernable world. We want fraudulent credit card charges to be reversable. We want the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook to be able to get alex jones to shut up. I don't think pushing further to make the law…
>Good, trustworthy governance. This example shows that you can't just shut off free speech to a few rogue nations, because states 'incompatible with liberal democracy' include the majority of the world's population. As we see, they hold enough influence to assert their censorship on all of us, regardless of where we are. What hypothetical 'trustworthy governance' would be less susceptible to India's influence than WM…
[deleted]
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#78Pretty similar to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre-sur-Haute_military_ra...
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get that pulling out of India would be an incredibly difficult move to even consider. But abandoning all principles should be as well.
Why is following other countries' laws viewed as "abandoning all principles"? A few days ago Linux removed all Russian maintainers to follow US laws. Has the Linux Foundation abandoned all principles? Should they have fought the US government?
> Has the Linux Foundation abandoned all principles?
All? No, but certainly some.
> Should they have fought the US government?
Yes
Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court
#80I wonder what would be an effective countermeasure against stuff like this. Maybe we need a write-only global database and somehow separate the hosting/publisher from the organization that certifies it. Imagine if they simply sign an archive which is distributed over IPFS or some other distributed system. It would become impossible to take down content and as such impossible to comply with any blocking orders. They c…
> I wonder what would be an effective countermeasure against stuff like this.
You withdraw all operations from within that country and you don't comply.