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

Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

pta.gov.pk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 268 posts

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#171

Post by pen2l »

rootusrootus wrote: post #61
pen2l wrote: post #50

Previously there was a comment that was quite elucidative made by an HN user here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34304824 In recent years I've come around to viewing the American ideal of absolute "free speech" as not being all that nuanced, particularly because we know know the speed at which viral false and illegitimate claims travel and the slower speed at which reasoned responses to those speech travel. I…

> I think we can all agree You'd be wrong. Many of us think that judging content by whether it offends someone is a terrible idea. Viewers should self-censor if they find something objectionable rather than subject everyone else to their personal opinions.

This is the kind of take that only exists on HN and is obviously wrong flat on its face if thought through for even a little bit. Someone can and does have the right to tell dead baby jokes to a father who has just lost a child but that doesn't mean it's okay that someone should, and indeed in a civilized and social society there are guardrails to prevent that sort of thing: that someone would get rebuked and if they continue being a jerk, that someone would in some manner be punished or rejected from that local community.

We judge the content of what others find offensive all the time, and we even agree that it is subjective, different people of different ages, backgrounds, experiences have different sensibilities, and as social beings we understand and respect this. The internet of course throws a wrench in all of this because it's hard to enforce moderation on a local basis as we do in the real world. But that does not mean that the way we have been living forever goes out the window.

I'm not saying we should do away with free speech, rather just that we have to work through things carefully and slowly. My hope is that after a little bit of debate, a liberal attitude prevails in Pakistan. But to respond with how folks are responding in this thread, of just putting gasoline on the fire, that's not really how progress is made, it is how we further elevate and agitate an already volatile happening -- we should probably not do that.

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#172

Post by 34611 »

cactusplant7374 wrote: post #43

Twitter appears to have complied with removing the BBC documentary tweets for users in India. So some tweets are not available in India. It does look like Wikipedia is ahead of Twitter in the free speech absolutist game if it prefers being blocked to compliance.

[flagged]

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#173

Post by mjamil »

LarryMullins wrote: post #135
nashashmi wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

What is "a follower"? Is that another term for Muslim? Your accusation doesn't make sense to me.

No, nashashmi is implying hnews_account_1 is an adherent of the same Muslim splinter group (known as Ahmadis or pejoratively as Qadiyanis; see [1]) as Abdus Salam [2], the sole Nobel Laureate that Pakistan has ever has. Salam was a prominent 20th physicist who predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons and the electroweak force.

nashashmi is gaslighting here by demonstrating two logical fallacies: both an appeal to authority ("Other nations also did this awful thing, so it must be OK") and putting forth a straw man argument ("I don't have any defense for what Pakistan did, so I'll accuse someone of bias").

I see no bias by hnews_account_1 here. I agree with hnews_account_1 in that the neighboring country they refer to (presumably India) would indeed have happily claimed Abdus Salam as one of their own and trumpeted his achievements; after all, Salam was educated in pre-partition India. In contrast, most Pakistanis today do not even know who Salam is because the Pakistan educational hierarchy deliberately ignores his achievements.

If anything, the notable bias (here, as shown by nashashmi, and in large, by the Pakistani establishment) is against the religious community that Salam belonged to. Since 1974, the Pakistani government (which polices who belongs to which religion, and forces you to declare your religion in government interactions) has imposed discrimination against this religious community by declaring them non-Muslim and preventing them from practicing their religion openly. Terror attacks against this community are common [3].

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmadiyya [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdus_Salam [3] https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2020/11/paki...

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#174

Post by ceejayoz »

_-david-_ wrote: post #157
ddevault wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The death penalty is abhorrent and indefensible, and religious freedom and the right to free expression are both included in the universal declaration of human rights, to which Pakistan is a signatory.

>The death penalty is abhorrent and indefensible Believe it or not, but some places don't have the resources to hold people in jail for decades. If there was a murderer and the place had no way to actually keep the murderer away from the general population, what would you recommend? Just ask the murderer to not murder again?

What countries don't have the prison capacity for murderers?

Even the bankrupt Taliban manages to keep 14k people in their prisons. https://www.voanews.com/a/taliban-refill-afghan-jails/693518...

Burundi's the last on the list of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)... and manages prisons, as well.

They're not opting for executions for the cost savings.

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#175

Post by 131012 »

throwaway09223 wrote: post #54
beardyw wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am trying to think why Wikipedia would care about this. They offer a free service - if you don't want it that's just disappointing.

They don't care. They know people can get around the blocks. Wikipedia is more valuable with accurate content, even if some countries make it harder to access.

May I suggest they really do care about the situation and this is why they refuse to block anything.

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#178

Post by computerfriend »

bovermyer wrote: post #106
jeoqn wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That implies that “modern” is unequivocally better than anything else.

Not sure why people are down-voting this. While theocracy is a clear and present danger, "modern" is too broad a label to apply as a counter to it. The more accurate counter would be policy based on empiricism. This is not predicated on the idea that the progression of time advances all things, but rather a timeless philosophy that has had its peaks and troughs throughout history.

It's because it's not accurate. The above comment was framing the argument, not making the argument. There wasn't an implicit value judgement. Someone else is free to argue that an oppressive 7th century religion is better or worse than modern times within that frame. Or argue (like you have done) that it's an inadequate framing.

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#179

Post by realworldperson »

spankalee wrote: post #89
robertlagrant wrote: post #5

I'm starting to view more and more things as nationalism vs globalism. E.g. multinational corporations vs national tax laws E.g. global internet services vs national privacy laws E.g. global internet services vs national decency laws (the posted issue) I'm starting to realise this mismatch is where a lot of friction is and will continue to be.

Decency laws is too kind of way to put this - they're forcing their religion on others. If countries would stop censoring free speech, we wouldn't have the problem at all.

[dead]

Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy

#180

Post by labrador »

robertlagrant wrote: post #5

I'm starting to view more and more things as nationalism vs globalism. E.g. multinational corporations vs national tax laws E.g. global internet services vs national privacy laws E.g. global internet services vs national decency laws (the posted issue) I'm starting to realise this mismatch is where a lot of friction is and will continue to be.

4chan is way ahead of you. They call it (pardon me) "globalhomo"

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=globalhomo

Edit: To be clear, I don't support the views expressed in 4chan. I don't participate, but I read because I find it interesting. I often think I should have been an anthropologist.

Post reply on HN