Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Someone reported this to the FBI, it's not actionable on a criminal level, but it breaks your TOS, heads-up" versus "we have deleted the encyclopedia for religious reasons". Yep, definitely comparable scenarios. Blasphemy carries the death penalty in Pakistan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_in_Pakistan
Yep, definitely comparable scenarios. I think it is. Pakastan can create whatever laws fit its culture. I would never dare to imagine imposing my values or beliefs on them. They should create their own Wiki alternative and make it popular within their nation. [Edit] Or if their people see fit change their laws, overthrow their government or whatever they deem appropriate for their culture. But that is entirely on the…
Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
21–30 of 268 posts
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#22> on account of not blocking / removing sacrilegious contents > Wikipedia was approached for blocking / removal of the said contents > platform neither complied by removing the blasphemous content nor appeared before the Authority. Anyone know what sacrilegious/blasphemous content they are referring to?
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#23"Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) has degraded Wikipedia services in the country on account of not blocking / removing sacrilegious contents. Wikipedia was approached for blocking / removal of the said contents by issuing a notice under applicable law and court order(s). An opportunity of hearing was also provided, however, the platform neither complied by removing the blasphemous content nor appeared befor…
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#24Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#25Similar things are happening in the West given US and Euro govts leaning on Social Media companies to censor dissenting/blasphemous views. Just think - what are you not allowed to say? What will get you banned or blacklisted?
The FBI sending Twitter emails about TOS violations they noticed and being executed for being an atheist are "similar" only if you really torture the definition.
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#26Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#27> on account of not blocking / removing sacrilegious contents > Wikipedia was approached for blocking / removal of the said contents > platform neither complied by removing the blasphemous content nor appeared before the Authority. Anyone know what sacrilegious/blasphemous content they are referring to?
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#28"Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) has degraded Wikipedia services in the country on account of not blocking / removing sacrilegious contents. Wikipedia was approached for blocking / removal of the said contents by issuing a notice under applicable law and court order(s). An opportunity of hearing was also provided, however, the platform neither complied by removing the blasphemous content nor appeared befor…
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.
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#29"Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) has degraded Wikipedia services in the country on account of not blocking / removing sacrilegious contents. Wikipedia was approached for blocking / removal of the said contents by issuing a notice under applicable law and court order(s). An opportunity of hearing was also provided, however, the platform neither complied by removing the blasphemous content nor appeared befor…
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.
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#30"Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) has degraded Wikipedia services in the country on account of not blocking / removing sacrilegious contents. Wikipedia was approached for blocking / removal of the said contents by issuing a notice under applicable law and court order(s). An opportunity of hearing was also provided, however, the platform neither complied by removing the blasphemous content nor appeared befor…
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.