Live data from Hacker News

US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

reuters.com

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where you live but I've been able to express myself without any form of approval. Granted, I tend to not encourage genocide or glorify fascist regimes, but that's just me.

Where do you live where you're allowed to express yourself without any form of approval? For instance, in the US, I cannot hysterically scream FIRE while running toward the exit of a theater, nor could I express a desire to cause bodily harm to an individual. Not that I would, per se, but if I did I'd be liable to prosecution for the damages caused in either instance. I'd have to get the approval of those involved (b…

The "shouting fire in a crowded theater" line is one of the most misunderstood pieces of legal dicta in US history. It comes from a case that was overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969).

Under current First Amendment law, the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless it is directed to inciting "imminent lawless action" and is "likely" to produce such action.

To illustrate how high this bar is: you can legally sell and wear a T-shirt that says "I heart killing [X group]". While many find that expression offensive or harmful, it is protected speech. This is because:

- It is not a true threat (it doesn’t target a specific individual with a credible intent to harm).

- It isn't incitement (it doesn't command a crowd to commit a crime immediately).

In the US, you don't need approval to express yourself. The default is that your speech is protected unless the government can prove it falls into a tiny handful of narrow, well-defined exceptions.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#243

What content bans does Europe have? /Confused European

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Censorship_in_Europe

Can we filter for current censorship? Hate to brake it to you but the top category in that page, "censorship in the soviet union" does not apply anymore.....

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#244
post #38

I just chaired a session at the FOCI conference earlier today, where people were talking about Internet censorship circumvention technologies and how to prevent governments from blocking them. I'd like to remind everyone that the U.S. government has been one the largest funders of that research for decades. Some of it is under USAGM (formerly BBG, the parent of RFE/RL) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agen…

Didn't Doge gut the USAGM?

Yep! Maximally closed as much as possible under the law. They also shut down other programs which aim to sidestep propaganda (including US propaganda), though some of those are starting to come back. Radio Free Asia, for example, https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/radio-free-asia-s...

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#246

It's kind of ironic given how much USA is censoring content based on their interest.

> It's kind of ironic given how much USA is censoring content based on their interest. What’s a good example?

See yesterday’s FCC hearing before congress. It’s hypocritical for the US to be doing the exact opposite of what they’re doing at home.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#248

What content bans does Europe have? /Confused European

There's a hate speech / violence law in the UK that is getting some people arrested for saying things like "round up all people of race X, put them into a hotel, and burn the hotel down." People like Joe Rogan and his ilk are re-packaging those examples as "people being arrested for just sharing their opinion."

Oh, is that what y'all are on about? I'm not too worried then. About Europe.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#249

Then won’t foreign governments just ban freedom.gov? This problem has already been solved with networks like Tor and I2P. It seems like it would be more strategic to fund those projects instead.

Maybe that's the purpose? Pushing European and global "allies" to show their cards. Some citizens will support more censorship, while some will start questioning. It's good to know where your rivals stand.

Also it is cheap, easy, non-controversial domestically in the US, and ethically coherent with American values.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Elon let a bunch of people generate lewd photographs depicting minors, then published it.

I decided to investigate these claims since it is frequently expressed by those attacking Elon or X. It seems to be yet another misrepresentation or falsehood spread around to achieve political gain.

I had ChatGPT investigate and summarize the report from CCDH it is based on. https://counterhate.com/research/grok-floods-x-with-sexualiz...

  "CCDH did not prove that X is widely distributing child sexual abuse material. Their report extrapolates from a small, non-random sample of AI-generated images, many of which appear to be stylized or fictional anime content. While regulators are rightly investigating whether Grok’s safeguards were insufficient, CCDH’s public framing collapses “sexualized imagery” and “youthful-looking fictional characters” into CSAM-adjacent rhetoric that is not supported by verified prevalence data or legal findings."
Scale of sexual content:

  “~3 million sexualized images generated by Grok”
  They sampled ~20,000 images, labeled some as sexualized, then extrapolated using estimated total image volume. The total image count (~4.6M) is not independently verified; extrapolation assumes uniform distribution across all prompts and users.
Images of children:

  “~23,000 sexualized images of children”
  They label images as “likely depicting minors” based on visual inference, not age metadata. No verification that these are real minors, real people, or legally CSAM.
CSAM framing:

  Implies Grok/X is flooding the platform with child sexual abuse material.
  The report explicitly avoids claiming confirmed CSAM, using phrases like “may amount to CSAM.” 
  Public-facing messaging collapses “sexualized anime / youthful-looking characters” into CSAM-adjacent rhetoric.
CCDH's bias:

  Ties to the UK Labour Party: Several of CCDH’s founders and leaders have deep ties to Britain's center-left Labour Party. Founder Imran Ahmed was an advisor to Labour MPs.
  Target Selection: The organization’s "Stop Funding Fake News" campaign and other deplatforming efforts have frequently targeted right-leaning outlets like The Daily Wire, Breitbart, and Zero Hedge. Critics argue they rarely apply the same scrutiny to misinformation from left-leaning sources.
  "Kill Musk's Twitter" Controversy: Leaked documents and reporting in late 2024 and 2025 alleged that CCDH had internal goals to "kill" Elon Musk’s X (Twitter) by targeting its advertising revenue.
Post reply on HN