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

261–270 of 506 posts

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#261

Post by beretguy »

riehwvfbk wrote: post #220
safety1st wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"With software, either the users control the program, or the program controls the users." - Richard M. Stallman, 2011, writing in Der Spiegel He was right. He was always right. About all of it. People didn't listen, or perhaps were never introduced to his ideas. Software grew faster than the idea of free software (on some level this was inevitable, since the latter is by definition a subset of the former). And so, th…

You must have missed the other news this week. Linux has joined the dark side too. Banning people based on nationality is certainly against freedom and any kind of ethics worthy of being called that.

Cry me a river.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#262

Post by YurgenJurgensen »

aaplok wrote: post #193
bitexploder wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nomenclature could use some polish, but on HN we know they mean ability to bypass technological restrictions .

I am probably not part of the "we" you are talking about, but I had no idea "normie" means that, and I couldn't infer it from the comment. In fact I inferred a completely wrong meaning from that comment (something like "unenlightened"). Isn't "normie" a pejorative word (genuine question)?

I suspect that ‘Normie’ is the normie-friendly version of an earlier 4chan-derived term, which was absolutely a pejorative.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#263

Post by berdario »

berdario wrote: post #258
pvaldes wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Linux has joined the dark side too. Banning people based on nationality "Linux" is not banning anybody. They must comply with the sanctions against Putin regime that many governments in the world raised, in response to insane Putin's behavior. Linux is not banning people based on nationality, is banning people based on their employers that is a different question. Linux has every right to ban somebody that would be…

> This is a win-win for the people banned also, because they are in a vulnerable position to be forced by the Russian regime to commit crimes. Nonsense. If your concern is that a maintainer might be strongarmed into getting surreptitious changes in the linux kernel, that's a misplaced concern because: 1- the maintainer in question didn't have access to approve changes across the whole linux kernel, but only on the dr…

To elaborate, if you're genuinely thinking that:

1- the affected maintainer has any concern of potentially being strongarmed

2- the affected maintainer appreciates being excluded from a project in which they worked on for several years

Just read their goodbye message in lkml:

https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/2m53bmuzemamzc4jzk2bj7tli22ruaa...

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#264

Post by beretguy »

mschuster91 wrote: post #237
immibis wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you make a new account, they'll only ban that one. I've been permanently banned from Reddit for really dumb reasons more times than I can count. The first time, I was sad. Now, I know it's a war between users and admins, and an individual account isn't worth very much.

Reddit bans are one thing, but your Gmail/Google Drive account getting banned? Not worth it, not over fucking Youtube ads. Remember, you don't have any recourse against Google bans.

So don't use google products then.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#265

Post by beretguy »

rustcleaner wrote: post #228
dartharva wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Those friends are why I own AAPL. Limit buy order for one more share of AAPL added to my IB before posting!

The reason I use iPhone is because it's not a Google product. Coincidentally, iPhone is the only realistic alternative.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#266

Post by hnbad »

lolinder wrote: post #112
ziofill wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not a fair comparison: land is finite in a way that the open internet isn’t.

Yep. It's hard for us to un-learn the instincts taught by millions of years of evolution. We see scarcity in everything, even where there is none.

The problem isn't that we "see scarcity", it's that we intentionally introduce scarcity. You can make more money with scarcity. It's a lot harder to make any money without scarcity, even.

Instead of Napster letting you download any song anyone ever bothered to digitize, we now have a dozen different music streaming services giving you access to the music from whichever publishers they managed to sign deals with and you have to pay a monthly fee and can only use a number of devices at the same time and not share with friends and family unless they also pay for the access.

Yes, of course there are good reasons for this: without paying, the artists don't get paid and that means making music becomes no more than an expensive hobby and yadda yadda but that's my point: we may have corporeal justifications for the scarcity we impose on the Internet but the scarcity exists and we deliberately created it and use the police and military to enforce it.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#268

Post by Aeolun »

nazka wrote: post #249
rustcleaner wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We must work to build an inter[dark]net which ideally fully divorces the user from the government and laws of the country the user is physically in (unless the user leaks his dox).

I can't imagine the kind of people it will attract. 5% of sane people and 95% doing the most hideous things in mankind. Law and Govs are not so bad that we should get rid of it. They do add value to society compared to a fully lawless anarchic community/tools/etc. There is a place where freedom does have to stop and trespassing that frontier will have consequences. We don't need to through all our laws and Gov (espec…

> They do add value to society compared to a fully lawless anarchic community/tools/etc.

Think it depends on how large you want your communities to be. It should be fine until some 200 people.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#269

Post by Aeolun »

ruthmarx wrote: post #177
marcus_holmes wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's all "beer and barbie on the beach" until you realise that's all illegal.

I'm already annoyed I have to wipe my devices whenever I travel there or risk a $5000 fine and maybe jail time if they want the password and I don't give it up. Australia has to be the least free country in the anglosphere.

What kind of thing do you have on your PC they’d care about?

Actually, I guess if you don’t want them to know you won’t tell me now either xD

I don’t like the idea of handing out my password any more, but wiping my PC is too much effort.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#270

Post by _el1s7 »

lifeisstillgood wrote: post #224

There are a lot of lessons to learn here 1. The Streisand effect. No-one on HN gave a monkeys about this dodgy news agency till today. Now half of us have read the archive about how they promote propaganda & fake news. Your reputation takes a hit 2. There is no absolute definition of “freedom”. Wikipedia is a fantastic resource for humanity in general and I think should be defended. But as more and more of humanity c…

Wikipedia looks like a fantastic resource, but it's not really a reliable source of information. Everyone can write things there, including people with biases and conflicting interests. Their rules about editing are really annoying and unfair, they don't care about facts.

I enjoy reading Wikipedia sometimes, but it's a broken system, a lot of truths missing in it's articles because of crap editors and political propaganda. Also it's admins are toxic and abuse their little power they have over every editor there.

Try editing some articles there, and you will see the dark side of Wikipedia.

Post reply on HN