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

Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 230 posts

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#101

Post by ghaff »

pjc50 wrote: post #75
bhouston wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That wording sounds like the decision was made in Israel and not the US. I would guess the shutdown requests came from Israeli security services. Thus it is final and not appealable and can also the reasoning can not be revealed.

However, if they've adversely affected an EU resident or even worse an EU national, the DMA forces them to allow an appeal and recourse.

I'm not familiar with what army the EU has to enforce that recourse. Ultimately, rights depend on the threat or actual application of force.

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#102

Post by Y-bar »

bhouston wrote: post #55
Y-bar wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Digital Markets Act and/or Digital Services Act ought to have something to say about this, especially the "this secret decision is final and we refuse to say anything else" part of the story.

That wording sounds like the decision was made in Israel and not the US. I would guess the shutdown requests came from Israeli security services. Thus it is final and not appealable and can also the reasoning can not be revealed.

The decision might just as well have been taken place on the moon, laws such as DSA, DMA, and GDPR tend to protect the resident and rarely cares where a decision affecting that resident was taken.

Example where GDPR tries to resolve the problem, but unfortunately not strongly enough: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_explanation#European_...

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#104

Post by utkarsh858 »

bhouston wrote: post #8

Was this decision made in Redmond or in Israel? Microsoft has offices in Israel and these offices are likely responsible for things happening in Israel, Gaza and the West Bank. Israel is currently at "war" with Gaza and having Israeli employees of Microsoft having the ability to disable anyone's account calling civilians in Gaza is pretty horrible. Is Microsoft via Skype and Hotmail participating in what Israel's lea…

[flagged]

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#105

Post by zerkten »

pgt wrote: post #3

This is why I have my own domain and control the MX records on the DNS on it, so that I can reroute email to a new email provider, if needed (I pay for Fastmail). Another nice thing about having a catch-all on own domain is that you can sign up to each service with a unique email address, e.g. @ , which makes it easy to see if any services ever sold your address.

>> Another nice thing about having a catch-all on own domain is that you can sign up to each service with a unique email address

This is true when services support sign-up with a password and you are an advanced user. I'm not sure that this is easy for many vulnerable people that need this. The advice you may need to add is that you should use these unique email addresses to create burner accounts on login providers (Microsoft accounts, Google accounts, etc.) because that's how you have to access some services.

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#106

Post by Hizonner »

jpcfl wrote: post #99

It is incredibly frustrating to realize that a lot of companies are within their right to deny you service as soon as you even _appear_ to pose a risk to them. Geico recently denied my renewal of insurance because they said their underwriters received notification that I use my vehicle for business. (I don't.) I have spent hours trying to explain to them that this is a mistake, but they have zero interest in providin…

"right"

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#107

Post by pjc50 »

ghaff wrote: post #101
pjc50 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, if they've adversely affected an EU resident or even worse an EU national, the DMA forces them to allow an appeal and recourse.

I'm not familiar with what army the EU has to enforce that recourse. Ultimately, rights depend on the threat or actual application of force.

Microsoft have to choose whether to operate in the EU. There's been a long struggle between conflicting rules of US unaccountable intelligence access vs. EU privacy law ("safe harbour") that is relevant here. https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2015/10/06/a-messa...

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#108

Post by Zak »

remram wrote: post #81
pgt wrote: post #3

This is why I have my own domain and control the MX records on the DNS on it, so that I can reroute email to a new email provider, if needed (I pay for Fastmail). Another nice thing about having a catch-all on own domain is that you can sign up to each service with a unique email address, e.g. @ , which makes it easy to see if any services ever sold your address.

What if your domain registrar kicks you out because you once logged in from ? You can't win here if corps want to hurt you.

ICANN has rules that limit how much power a registrar has when they choose to stop doing business with someone. As a rule, registrars can't just cancel your domains.

Re: Microsoft cutting crucial link to Gaza, Palestinians say

#110

Post by robinsonb5 »

jimnotgym wrote: post #6

These companies want to become as ubiquitous as a public utility. Therefore they should be regulated like a public utility

It's worse than that - they're gradually becoming a new form of governance - and one that you can't vote out.

The term "Facebook Jail" might be coined jokingly (and the consequences of being there are pretty trivial) but the mere existence of the term is a tacit acceptance of the idea of judicial oversight by a private corporation.

Yes, you can choose not to engage with meta or its products, or (less easily) Microsoft or Google - but we're close to the point where refusing to use the products of (and thus be defacto-governed by) one of the tech giants will have implications beyond self-imposed inconvenience.

Already you'll be excluded from a significant proportion of social plans if you don't have either WhatsApp or Messenger.

Post reply on HN