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

Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

alqst.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 512 posts

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#311

Post by pesus »

tejohnso wrote: post #71
p-e-w wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not true, there’s a third option: Stop operating in those countries. Which used to be a common choice for tech companies, until it somehow became unthinkable for some reason.

Meta is not a political or moral entity, it's a for profit tech company. I don't see why it would be expected to make judgement calls on government requirements. Are we expecting Meta to take a political stance for or against specific policies in every country in which it operates? How would its politics be determined? I think the sensible thing for the corporation to do is to operate as widely as possible and follow…

Meta lost the ability to claim they're not political when they donated to Trump, one of those child abusers you're talking about. They seem to have no problem taking a political stance when it benefits them.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#312

Post by 8note »

runtime_terror wrote: post #233
pear01 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this summation is the government is complicit in their actions. Thus it undermines this simple private gain, public pain argument. A lot of the times when Meta does something like this the fact the governments in question essentially demand that action seems to be ignored. Would you have a better view of corporate power if corporations could unilaterally ignore the laws of sovereign countries in whic…

> Wouldn't it normatively be more in keeping with a proper distinction between public and private to say lobby your congressman to stop the ceaseless funding and weapon deployments to countries in the ME that don't share our values? If an individual lobbying the government wouldn't be overpowered by monied corporate interest in the government, maybe. Sadly that's not the case, at least in the US. > The NSA has all yo…

>> The NSA has all your data anyway.

> Yes, and this is incredibly unpopular and if we had a real representative democracy we'd be able to do something about it.

no, this is something people dont care about, and is a low invasive way for the government to solve a problem people do care about - terror attacks

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#313

Post by 8note »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #206
aurareturn wrote: post #133

If Meta operates in Saudi Arabia and UAE, shouldn't they follow their laws?

I don't think someone accessing content on US servers run by a US company counts as "operating in" any country other than the US. But Meta is an international company, so maybe they have servers/staff in Saudi Arabia, in which case their only options are to leave the country or comply.

operating here is the buying and selling of ads

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#314

Post by pembrook »

Can just re-title this to: "[Company] forced to follow local laws where it operates as always has been the case"

Meta also had to block legitimate coverage in the US during the Covid pandemic because it conflicted with whatever the mainstream narrative was at the time, due to government forcing their hand.

If you're mad at any company that's following laws you don't like, you should direct your ire at the government that created the laws or policies, not at the companies that have no power to overrule said governments.

On one hand HN gets mad when big tech is perceived to have too much power, then on the other hand HN gets mad when big tech doesn't have enough power. It doesn't seem very coherent, just a mob getting angry at random emotional triggers.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#315

Post by appplication »

logicchains wrote: post #299
noname120 wrote: post #180

Do they have a choice? It’s either that or they are shown the door, in which case they will probably be replaced by worse local alternatives in terms of freedom of speech and gov influence

People here all complain about social American social media companies defying the law when they refuse to cooperate with EU censorship, then they complain about them not defying the law with Saudi censorship, it's a double standard.

Yes of course, clearly the EU and Saudia Arabia both have equal censorship initiatives and human rights track records.

Apologies for the sarcasm. But I think it’d be helpful for you to expand a little on what you mean by EU “censorship” in this case.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#316

Post by embedding-shape »

nekzn wrote: post #296
mikestew wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does this mean HN users are only happy when US companies are forced to follow whatever regulations HN users like, but not others? Seems hypocritical. It just means HN hasn’t yet held the vote to decide what we collectively think on the matter. The vote takes place tomorrow, and you need 500 karma to be eligible to vote. In seriousness, what an immature view of the world to think an online forum has a hive mind that c…

You probably realise that this website has a voting system (that’s what the small icons next to all comments do; they are not meant to be triangles but arrows). Through this voting system users can show their support or disapproval of any content posted by other users. When a majority of users consistently upvote the same set of opinions positively, you can tell how that majority feels about some matter.

> When a majority of users consistently upvote the same set of opinions positively, you can tell how that majority feels about some matter.

Assuming everyone actually does vote, which seems like a large assumption to make. Maybe what, 10% of people browsing/commentating actually votes? Less? So you have a small intersection much less than "majority of users".

Just read what people read, stop caring about irrelevant numbers, and participate faithfully in the discussions, the points matters nothing, either for if the comment is true or not, or if the rest of the HN community likes the comment or not, it simply doesn't matter.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#317

Post by ktm5j »

buellerbueller wrote: post #265
ktm5j wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will do as I please, thanks.

This is an insane response.

I asked for social media options and dude went on a self entitled rant saying I shouldn't want social media. I feel like my response was rather level headed considering what I wanted to tell him to go do, but maybe that's just me.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#318

Post by stvltvs »

jjulius wrote: post #205
stvltvs wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The trick is to get your friends and family to jump ship with you.

I jumped ship, and the friends and family who are important to me are still on the ship, by and large. Yet I've never felt as though I'm missing out. We communicate via alternative forms (texts, calls, hanging out in person) and I have never felt disconnected. The whole trope about people being worried about missing out is misplaced - that feeling is exactly what these products are designed to imbue in their users. U…

I largely agree, but this discounts the personal value of keeping contact with weaker connections that we don't talk with often but still have some concern for.

Re: Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

#320

Post by arandomhuman »

noname120 wrote: post #180

Do they have a choice? It’s either that or they are shown the door, in which case they will probably be replaced by worse local alternatives in terms of freedom of speech and gov influence

>Do they have a choice?

Yes, they absolutely have a choice. People can choose to not assist with transgressions against human rights in the year 2026 :)

Post reply on HN