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

Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 506 posts

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#181

Post by eternauta3k »

ruthmarx wrote: post #146

We desperately need more work done on a separate internet that by design cannot and never can be censored. I know there are some projects toward that already, but my fear is they won't reach maturity before governments blocking any content they don't want their population accessing is the norm. Some things should be illegal, sure, but if governments start attacking free speech and limiting what materials a population…

If you take wikipedia rogue and only accept crypto donations, the budget will take a nosedive. And the project will lose all relevance once the non-tor mirrors are blocked in the big countries.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#182

Post by sideshowb »

ImJamal wrote: post #35
josephcsible wrote: post #29

Does the WMF have any presence in India? Why don't they just ignore the ruling?

All of Wikipedia would likely be banned which, I assume, they want to avoid.

It's tempting to think the better strategy is to let the current Indian government block them and see how that plays out.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#183

Post by onetokeoverthe »

dartharva wrote: post #124
typewithrhythm wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As more normies got on the web more of it becomes about how to herd them. In the early days there was less gain from authoritarian actions, because you are more likely to be resisted by the users of any service. The current users don't know how to bypass restrictions, and are generally more numerous. Making authoritarian actions more valuable. Unfortunately this leads to previously useful sites declining.

It's not just the newer generations. I have multiple friends who are literally afraid of using ad blockers and sideloading apps on their Macs in fear of some imaginary boogeyman out to get them. And VPNs are exclusively the domain of criminals, apparently. There are a dominating amount of people who have turned into the caricature of the perfect CONSUMER. It is so frustrating.

make a tv movie called the craigslist killer and get every news program and social media troll room to hype it.

change began with smartphone release and accelerated.

the old internet with only the top half of the iq chart participating was better.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#184

Post by adhi01 »

fwipsy wrote: post #15

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International covers the lawsuit as well. "In July 2024, ANI filed a lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court — claiming to have been defamed in its article on Wikipedia — and sought ₹2 crore (US$240,000) in damages.[16][17][18] On 5 September, the Court threatened to hold Wikimedia guilty of contempt for failing to disclose information about the editors…

What a joke of a country.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#185

Post by ruthmarx »

eternauta3k wrote: post #181
ruthmarx wrote: post #146

We desperately need more work done on a separate internet that by design cannot and never can be censored. I know there are some projects toward that already, but my fear is they won't reach maturity before governments blocking any content they don't want their population accessing is the norm. Some things should be illegal, sure, but if governments start attacking free speech and limiting what materials a population…

If you take wikipedia rogue and only accept crypto donations, the budget will take a nosedive. And the project will lose all relevance once the non-tor mirrors are blocked in the big countries.

I wasn't talking about Wikipedia directly, but the net as a whole.

I agree if you took wikipedia rogue it would take a nosedive, but what I would expect would happen is the rogue Wikipedia would not try to duplicate Wikipedia's article, bur rather just have uncensored versions of articles available which is a much more feasible project.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#186

Post by paganel »

dartharva wrote: post #124
typewithrhythm wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As more normies got on the web more of it becomes about how to herd them. In the early days there was less gain from authoritarian actions, because you are more likely to be resisted by the users of any service. The current users don't know how to bypass restrictions, and are generally more numerous. Making authoritarian actions more valuable. Unfortunately this leads to previously useful sites declining.

It's not just the newer generations. I have multiple friends who are literally afraid of using ad blockers and sideloading apps on their Macs in fear of some imaginary boogeyman out to get them. And VPNs are exclusively the domain of criminals, apparently. There are a dominating amount of people who have turned into the caricature of the perfect CONSUMER. It is so frustrating.

It can go the other way, too. I’m a computer programmer and I don’t use an ad-blocker, one of the reasons being that the presence of add is a very good indicator of websites that I should avoid. That strategy makes me actuality consume less content on the web, which I find as a big plus, and that’s because the great majority of today’s websites are filled with ads.

Related, the same goes for TV, where I don’t try to avoid them by purchasing an even more exclusive access to TV content (such as streaming), I just choose not to watch it because mainstream TV has become infested by ads. So the idea is not to play the game, just to ignore it.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#187

Post by indrora »

ruthmarx wrote: post #172
teractiveodular wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking Wikipedia down for India would probably be a victory as far as the BJP is concerned.

Would it? It's not like Indians would stop accessing it. Then due to a stupid ruling they lost the ability to have any control over it at all.

Actual change is not required, symbolic change is enough.

India, much like Nazi Germany, is a culture that views position over all else; simply being in power is enough to make your word greater than anyone else's truth.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#188

Post by haccount »

anal_reactor wrote: post #168
lolinder wrote: post #17

On January 18 2012, Wikipedia went black to draw attention to SOPA [0], a bill they described as one that "could fatally damage the free and open Internet". Since then, we've seen a slow and steady march in the direction we all dreaded. Country after country has decided that they have the right to block content on the "free and open Internet", and business after business (even those who joined the SOPA protests) has…

Internet transitioned from a fun toy for nerds to a serious tool used by the masses, and needs to be regulated accordingly. Looking back, it was extremely naive to think that even though we regulate every single aspect of social life, the internet would remain the bastion of freedom just because it would be cool if it did. Think about all the rules we have about what can and what cannot be said not to break social co…

"needs to be"

No it doesn't. And neither do we need regulation for what I can say at a family gathering or on the street.

Thought policing and other neo-puritanian movements can go fuck themselves.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#190

Post by boredhedgehog »

josephg wrote: post #62
alwayslikethis wrote: post #42

I 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…

> We want the parents of the victims of Sandy Hook to be able to get alex jones to shut up.

No, I want to be able to hear what Alex Jones has to say. I want no censorship whatsoever. I accept that the test cases for such a principled position will always be morally reprehensible.

Post reply on HN