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

371–380 of 506 posts

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#371

Post by ToxicMegacolon »

indrora wrote: post #187
ruthmarx wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> India, much like Nazi Germany,

To compare the largest democracy in the world to a genocidal regime is utterly disrespectful to the 1.5 Billion Indians.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#372

Post by icu »

It's preposterous for an Indian court to block access to a Wikipedia page from outside of India. While alarming, I could understand an IP geoblock for Indian traffic but not all traffic outside of India. This is an overreach and impacts the sovereignty of non-Indian citizens and non-Indian residents.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#373

Post by nradov »

immibis wrote: post #238
endgame wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have governments become more authoritarian? Judging by the various misinformation legislation they're rushing to adopt, yes. The free internet said too many things that powerful people didn't like. An Australian example: https://x.com/SenatorRennick/status/1834455727764869593#m

Misinformation is an actual problem, so I don't know what you expect the government to do about it. Nothing at all? We saw how that idea worked out in the USA.

Doing nothing is working fine in the USA so far. Not all problems need to be solved, and sometimes the solution is worse than the problem.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#374

Post by startupsfail »

Self-Perfection wrote: post #364
contravariant wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If possible it would be better to let India block wikipedia themselves, that way the government doesn't get to shift blame on Wikipedia. Whichever way it goes the government has a lot of control over the narrative and it's a lot harder for them to hide that it is their decision to block wikipedia completely.

Governments do not hesitate to blatantly shift blame. For instance, Russian internet censorship agency blocks YouTube for a couple of months and they still pretend that it is Google's technical issue: https://www.rbc.ru/technology_and_media/23/10/2024/6718fc469...

I’m a bit surprised Google is still serving at Russia, are they doing it to avoid loosing browser and search market share? They could not be making any money on advertising there, I assume?

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#375

Post by playingalong »

laxmin wrote: post #271
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…

Streisand effect is oversold. It is temporary as heck. People will forget about anything, no matter the extent of Streisand effect and go onto the next tictok video or whatever. Who gives a flying fk anyways about an article on wikipedia.

Not sure. Hardly anyone would remember if Streisand was a singer or actor or whoever. Now her name is mostly tied to Streisand effect, not the art she had produced.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#376

Post by BeFlatXIII »

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…

> Internet transitioned from a fun toy for nerds to a serious tool used by the masses, and needs to be regulated accordingly

Don't give in like that. Let those normies get hurt. It's their personal problem.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#377

Post by tacticalturtle »

ToxicMegacolon wrote: post #355
random_ind_dude wrote: post #306

I understand that Wikipedia has done this to not lose the possibility to appeal the court's decision. However, if the appeal is not successful and ANI wins, I think Wikipedia should just block India completely. I believe that will blow up spectacularly in ANI's face if everyone comes to know the reason for the block. Right now only a few people in India know about the ongoing dispute between ANI and Wikipedia. A coun…

> if the appeal is not successful and ANI wins, I think Wikipedia should just block India completely. Let me see if I understand this correctly. It seems below is the sequence of events you are advocating for: 1. Wikipedia is allowed to legally represent themselves in the court of law. 2. Court looks at the case presented by ANI and Wikipedia, and decides that ANI is right and Wikipedia is wrong 3. Wikipedia should t…

…yes it does make sense?

They’re complying within the rules fully, but if they decide the rules are too onerous or compromising on their core mission, the legally correct thing to do is to take their ball and go home.

The rest of us not in India don’t want to be affected by the rulings of a Delhi court.

If the citizens of India don’t like this outcome, it’s up to them to fix it.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#378

Post by ToxicMegacolon »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #366
ToxicMegacolon wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if the appeal is not successful and ANI wins, I think Wikipedia should just block India completely. Let me see if I understand this correctly. It seems below is the sequence of events you are advocating for: 1. Wikipedia is allowed to legally represent themselves in the court of law. 2. Court looks at the case presented by ANI and Wikipedia, and decides that ANI is right and Wikipedia is wrong 3. Wikipedia should t…

Maybe not block it themselves, but put a prominent notice at the top linking to the case and article and see what the Indian government will do next. :)

I don't think that will help a lot. This my opinion, but I think most Indians treat western sources such as NYT, BBC to be biased/racist against India. If wikipedia were to put a banner on top, it would just end up being another entry in that list.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#379

Post by BeFlatXIII »

thimabi wrote: post #122
tomrod wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the way it is, unless people accept it as such. Sorry, but VPNs exist, Wikipedia is inherently clonable and downloadable. Silicon rock beats Indian paper courts, any way you slice it, unless Wikipedia chooses to back down. They shouldn't.

I agree that the decision is wrong and unfair, and that it can be easily circumvented. That does not negate India’s right to legislate as it wants, nor does it prevent the Indian government from repressing citizens who choose to defy the law. It’s very unfortunate, but there is more to this case than simply negating a country’s jurisdiction or encouraging nationals to challenge it.

> prevent the Indian government from repressing citizens who choose to defy the law

This is why it is so important to spread the knowledge of how to make IEDs.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#380

Post by BeFlatXIII »

colechristensen wrote: post #101
throwaway313373 wrote: post #100

Since when does Delhi high court have worldwide jurisdiction?

Since Wikipedia folded to their demands. The correct action would have been to black out India, but they chose otherwise

Why not keep serving India and force themselves to be blocked by Indian ISPs? Do they have any assets in India?
Post reply on HN