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

Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

nationalpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 414 posts

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#331

Post by thrance »

1234letshaveatw wrote: post #295
thrance wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes we know, being pro universal healthcare is equally as radical as building literal concentration camps and sending legal immigrants to them. The left has never oppressed the right in this country. Being banned from twitter for saying racial slurs is not oppression .

ahh yes, that convenient "in the west" qualifier to exclude every communist country that, surprise! ran literal concentration camps.

I did not put these words in my comment, what are you even talking about?

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#332

Post by isaacremuant »

aceofspades19 wrote: post #184
BJones12 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They want to ruin the lives of those who oppose them. The Canadian Liberal government has previously attempted the same goal by de-banking protestors, in a move that the courts later ruled unconstitutional.

No one got "debanked", it was a temporary freeze for a few days and for a small number of accounts. I also disagree that it was to ruin the lives of those who oppose them, the money was released back to them, that seems like an odd way to ruin someone's life. Surely the tyrannical Liberal government would have been able to do more than keep them from accessing their money for a few days if they truly wanted to ruin l…

This is such a disingenous comment.

Yes. They did attack their sources of income and blocked protestors from accessing THEIR money to stop them from protesting.

You minimizing it like "just a few accounts, just a few days" is not only false but also doesn't acknowledge the fact that it should NEVER Happen.

But hey, there's always the one saying that reality doesn't happen even when the government attacks from all angles as a coercion mechanism. What's the euphemism now? What's the handbook? "Free speech but not freedom of consequences"?

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#333

Post by isaacremuant »

btbuildem wrote: post #119
BJones12 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They want to ruin the lives of those who oppose them. The Canadian Liberal government has previously attempted the same goal by de-banking protestors, in a move that the courts later ruled unconstitutional.

Let's not defend the konvoy agitators here, these were legit seditionists who were given far too much leeway to start with. Cutting off their access to crowdsourced funds was too little too late, they should have been shut down more forcefully much sooner.

Authoritian through and through.

Go enjoy everything daddy gov tells you. If you claim it's an overreach you're a seditious agitator working for "the enemy (TM)"

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#334

Post by isaacremuant »

goku12 wrote: post #8
incomingpain wrote: post #4

Consider this scenario. Your isp emails you that they are terminating your account. You phone gets disconnected. You call them and helpdesk doesnt have a clue why. You try to sign up for new services and they refuse and wont say why. All because a politician has decided it 'reasonable' to disconnect you from the internet; and he can order complete secrecy and there's no judicial oversight. Perhaps you showed up at th…

Let me remind everyone this again. Democracy is not an autocracy with time limits and turns. It's not a system where you elect a few individuals and hand them the power to rule over you for a few years. They are supposed to be your representatives who raise your concerns and protect your interests in a forum that takes decisions that affect all of you. Legislation like these are the small steps that convert the latte…

> Always take legislation like this seriously and hold your representatives responsible for it. Let them know that their political career in your constituency is finished for good if they support such moves

But it isn't. I've gone the route of writing my representatives but when most people support the measures or at least don't oppose them they can easily laugh in your face or outright lie to you, claiming that protests aren't banned when they are (e.g. covid times) and things like that.

Most people here probably called me some government/media pushed negative label just for protesting to uphold freedom/constitutional rights/human rights.

It's not that easy to advocate effectively once you realize gov/media funded propaganda permeates really well.

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#335

Post by LexiMax »

boringg wrote: post #322
34679 wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>they are completely reliant on foreign trade for their economy. If China cut trade ties with the US, which country do you think will still be able to produce everything it needs? People like to think of China as just a source of cheap consumer goods, but we are much more reliant on them than that. Every power plant has Chinese components that keep it functioning. Every farm, automobile, communication network, aircra…

It goes both ways.

Apropos what?

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#336

Post by vixen99 »

xvector wrote: post #182
zahlman wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> proven to be dangerous to others if they access the internet. What exactly would this entail? Some people nowadays seem to have a very broad conception of "safety", broad enough to cause serious concern on the part of advocates for freedom and privacy.

It will invariably be reduced to "saying mean things on the internet" by the government. I do not understand why people are so willing to give governments an ever-increasing amount of power. People never learn from history.

From the UK: Seems to me that very few people except those with very direct interests, support the Keir Starmer Government and his Finance Minister - Reeves who is universally regarded as a disaster (armed with an Oxford PPE degree & yet driving businesses down and out in the UK). My point: 'so willing to give ... power' ? We have three more years of this administration and meanwhile seem unable to do anything to prevent them creating the Britain of their fantasies.

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#338

Post by scarmig »

torben-friis wrote: post #310
kelipso wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s interesting how there is this pre-war vibe going on but when you describe the actual predictions, it seems extremely unlikely. It feels more like a phenomenon created through the internet than actual pre-war anything.

The china thing is very out there - but I’d see them going for the push in Taiwan and things escalating there. My main concern as a European is Russia. It is a historical truth that once a country goes through the process of starting a war economy it doesn’t usually dissolve or sit idle - conflict is going to happen there. For America, watching from the outside, a civil war seems much more likely than direct war with…

A war with China will do massive damage to the European and world economies, though, even if Europe stays entirely out of it. China more or less stops exporting (and importing); the economies of South Korea and Japan immediately contract 25% or more; Russia faces massive and nearly infinite demand for its resources from China; oil states in the Middle East would face massive price volatility followed by a collapse in demand and a loss of 50% of their government revenues; and every two bit nation in the world would decide now is the time to pursue revanchist feuds since everyone who could object is otherwise occupied.

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#339

Post by LexiMax »

einarfd wrote: post #321
Boogie_Man wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be the wrong place to ask these questions, but this comment caused me to think about the situation. Russia and/or Putin has been sold to me as "crazy" since the 90s. I don't really believe that, and presume it's because it's an explanation for their behavior which doesn't require America to consider how seriously we've been dicking over Russia. This is not to say Russia wouldn't dick us if they could (they…

The current Russian regime believes in sphere of influence, and they view Ukraine, the baltics, at least some parts eastern europe, and probably more as a natural part of their sphere of influence. This crashes with the western view where countries and populations have a right to self determination. Some of the countries that Russia want to fall under their sphere are also members of the EU, which make this even more…

There's actually conspiracy theories that are at the very least adjacent to this world view.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_revolution

It's the idea that fraudulent elections in former Soviet states were not merely the result of fed-up populations, but were actually western backed conspiracies with the aim of eroding the Russian sphere of influence.

Re: Canadian bill would strip internet access from 'specified persons', no warrant

#340

Post by swat535 »

kelipso wrote: post #306
MagicMoonlight wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’re definitely in the pre-war era. It’s like when Britain was trying to negotiate with Hitler while rearming in the background. China is going to attack pearl harbour in the hopes that a sudden unexpected attack will cripple the pacific fleet and knock America out of the war. It won’t work, we’ll go through hell again. But every time these places think it will work, and they don’t factor in the fact that they are c…

It’s interesting how there is this pre-war vibe going on but when you describe the actual predictions, it seems extremely unlikely. It feels more like a phenomenon created through the internet than actual pre-war anything.

I don't know about parent's prediction regarding China but a major war between Israel and Iran is upcoming this year or early next year, which will involve United States by definition.

We are likely in pre-war era right now, dismissing it as "internet phenomenon" is shortsighted.

Post reply on HN