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

431–440 of 506 posts

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#431

Post by Rury »

ziofill wrote: post #99
Rury wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just politics... Replace "open internet" with "land" and imagine countries (ie people) are attempting to block others access to some resource. It was naive to assume that the internet wouldn't adhere the nature of our reality.

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

Clearly you miss the point or don't understand politics, if you think the matter or comparison I made has anything to do with finitism. Politics has everything to do with conflicts in wants. For example, some people want free speech, and other people don't want other people to be able to spread lies or what they perceive as lies. Do you see how these wants are at odds with each other, or that two people can have opposing wants? Such conflicts can arise wherever humans interact with each other, and the internet isn't different somehow because it is less finite. I mean, do you think there aren't people out there who don't want to police the internet?

Simply, put, politics is not limited to matters of finitism. And the example I gave, is a perfectly fitting example of where politics is evident.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#432

Post by defrost »

ruthmarx wrote: post #422
cmrdporcupine wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What? The US has been pulling this crap since 9/11, so I'm not sure what you're going on about IRT the Anglo-Sphere. The US only has privacy rights for Americans. As a non-citizen traveler, they routinely belittle, humiliate, and violate such privacy, demanding access to people's phones at risk of detention (or at best being sent back home) being exactly one of the things they do. Ask almost any Canadian what they th…

> so I'm not sure what you're going on about IRT the Anglo-Sphere. Australia is worse than the US for this, and worse than any other anglo country. > The US only has privacy rights for Americans. Yes, and Australia doesn't even have privacy rights for Australians. Hence worse. > As a non-citizen traveler, they routinely belittle, humiliate, and violate such privacy, demanding access to people's phones at risk of dete…

They need a legal basis and they are required to cite that:

https://galballyparker.com.au/can-australian-border-force-se...

In my experience and by my reading of performance stats US Border force are far more intrusive and over bearing than Australian Border forces.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#433

Post by spartach »

seppel wrote: post #406
startupsfail wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> They could not be making any money on advertising there, I assume? When they show an advertisement of, say, some asian company to a russian user, they are still making money, aren't they?

They just don't show any ads to Russian users (if the user doesn't use a VPN to the outer world).

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#434

Post by TrapLord_Rhodo »

instagraham wrote: post #274

As an Indian, you cannot understand the despair this makes me feel. ANI is a bit like privatised Pravda operating in service to the government, yet, still pretending to be independent journalism. Wherever there is a critic of the government, ANI exists to slander such critics as a service. As a discerning reader, you learn to avoid mainstream media that quotes ANI (don't even consider watching a TV channel). You seek…

"Code is law" is a phrase that has pervaded in smart contracts and crypto. That is the technology that can challenge this.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#435

Post by Sabinus »

philwelch wrote: post #308
Sabinus wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incredible that in this comment thread there are suggestions the Biden government is fascist, even though Biden allowed his son to be prosecuted but if the reverse happened Trump would obviously interfere.

Federal prosecutors tried to make an extremely favorable plea deal with Hunter Biden that granted immunity to a host of crimes he wasn’t charged with. The judges ended up throwing it out. Don’t rule out a lame duck pardon, either. Both Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton pardoned their ne’er-do-well relatives, and it’s very common for Presidents to issue pardons during their final days in office.

>Don’t rule out a lame duck pardon, either.

Biden was asked if he would pardon his son, and he said no. But this is entirely beside the point, because Trump would pardon his son without a second thought and Trump supporters wouldn't blink.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-tells-muir-wouldnt-par... https://edition.cnn.com/2024/06/06/politics/biden-will-not-p... https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c133mdjkl7go

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#436

Post by hayleox »

moralestapia wrote: post #365
hayleox wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wikipedia doesn't currently have the technical ability to block a single article on a country basis. They had 36 hours to comply with this order and so took what action they could. The goal is to win the long-term appeal battle and avoid the entire site getting blocked permanently, but if they didn't comply with the short-term legal requirements, that path becomes much harder. Lose a battle but win the war.

>Wikipedia doesn't currently have the technical ability to block a single article on a country basis. I can imagine. That's too much to ask to a company that's been on business for 20 years and have received 1.3B USD in total. I could come up w/ a solution to that in an afternoon on my $5/mo server but yeah "you don't understand the scale of wikipedia" or some bs. Not "donating" a single cent ever again.

Here's what their server stack looks like: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_servers

Lot of replication and caching in there. For every cache there has to be a solution for how we're gonna make sure India doesn't receive the cached version, or receives a different cached version than the rest of the world. You also need to be sure that none of your changes are going to cause any significant reliability or performance issues. If you wanted to block India from accessing the entire site you could just cut them off at the top of the diagram, but blocking just one article means you have to get a lot more in the weeds.

Could they have hacked something together in 36 hours? Maybe. But the risk of causing larger reliability issues, or of having the forbidden article still partially accessible in India, would not be worth it.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#437

Post by ruthmarx »

defrost wrote: post #432
ruthmarx wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> so I'm not sure what you're going on about IRT the Anglo-Sphere. Australia is worse than the US for this, and worse than any other anglo country. > The US only has privacy rights for Americans. Yes, and Australia doesn't even have privacy rights for Australians. Hence worse. > As a non-citizen traveler, they routinely belittle, humiliate, and violate such privacy, demanding access to people's phones at risk of dete…

They need a legal basis and they are required to cite that: https://galballyparker.com.au/can-australian-border-force-se... In my experience and by my reading of performance stats US Border force are far more intrusive and over bearing than Australian Border forces.

> They need a legal basis and they are required to cite that:

What is the bar for a legal basis? In practice it seems equivalent to the way cops claim to smell weed as grounds for a search.

> In my experience and by my reading of performance stats US Border force are far more intrusive and over bearing than Australian Border forces.

Anecdotes will be anecdotes, but I flew in and out of the US for years before becoming a citizen and never had issues. Honestly I found UK immigration to be the rudest and most intrusive but that was just my experience.

Also stats don't mean much since IIRC Australia stopped recording or at least making public the number of devices they search.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#438

Post by ruthmarx »

Aeolun wrote: post #430
ruthmarx wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> _and_ data on their PC that requires wiping. All data requires wiping because no government has a right to it without a warrant or as part of an investigation, no matter what the data is.

Yeah, no. If my 5 year old can look at it without worry, so can random airport guy number 34.

You continue to miss the point. But if you're happy handing over your personal data, and your stance is representative of most Australians, that's probably why privacy protections are so weak in Australia - most don't understand why they should care.

Re: Wikipedia article blocked worldwide by Delhi high court

#439

Post by defrost »

ruthmarx wrote: post #437
defrost wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They need a legal basis and they are required to cite that: https://galballyparker.com.au/can-australian-border-force-se... In my experience and by my reading of performance stats US Border force are far more intrusive and over bearing than Australian Border forces.

> They need a legal basis and they are required to cite that: What is the bar for a legal basis? In practice it seems equivalent to the way cops claim to smell weed as grounds for a search. > In my experience and by my reading of performance stats US Border force are far more intrusive and over bearing than Australian Border forces. Anecdotes will be anecdotes, but I flew in and out of the US for years before becomin…

> What is the bar for a legal basis?

See link.

> In practice it seems equivalent to the way cops claim ...

How many times have you been asked to hand your phone over exactly? In any case, you're free to challenge, etc. See link.

> Anecdotes will be anecdotes, but I flew in and out of the US for years before becoming a citizen and never had issues.

Like most people then. Whether crossing US or Australian borders.

> I found UK immigration to be

So Australia's not the worst "anglo country" then?

> since IIRC Australia stopped recording or at least making public

Do you recall correctly? Did Australia stop? Are there Australians that have access to raw stats on health, border incidents, etc?

Post reply on HN