Live data from Hacker News

US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

reuters.com

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#761

Then won’t foreign governments just ban freedom.gov? This problem has already been solved with networks like Tor and I2P. It seems like it would be more strategic to fund those projects instead.

US can probably use their soft power to influence them not to do that. Also would imagine the US gov could also set up some more censorship resistant access methods.

This comment generated a lot of activity. It's very interesting watching the vote count of it move with the daylight (it went down during night in US/day in EU, and went back up when the US woke back up)

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#762

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> First off, the UK isn't in the EU I would guess that is why the GP said "EU and UK" > ot a single website is blocked for me here in the Netherlands, quite literally none One EU country. At the very least I know you have censored search results as that is an EU wide requirement of the right to be forgotten. > I can pirate anything I want from anywhere etc. Multiple EU countries are blocking pirate sites. https://tor…

> At the very least I know you have censored search results as that is an EU wide requirement of the right to be forgotten. How is the right to be forgotten a bad thing exactly? You can't request a news article be deleted if you're a prominent public figure for obvious reasons, but if you're a random Joe Schmoe then being able to force companies to take down things they've collected about you is a good thing. And are…

> How is the right to be forgotten a bad thing exactly? You can't request a news article be deleted if you're a prominent public figure for obvious reasons,

Criminals and politicians have used it to get removed from search results. The news article might be there, but no one will find it.

> I'm sure it's not the only EU country to not block anything, even though corrupt idiots in Spain and Italy also exist.

Exactly my point. You cannot generalise about the EU and say "it does not happen in the EU"

> And are you implying search engines in the US don't have things "censored" all the time anyway?

I never said that!

> I mean, good? If business are so incompetent/malicious that they can't even comply with the GDPR

So, to be clear, you think its good that people in the EU cannot read some news sources?

> I've literally never come across a blocked page due to GDPR

Maybe your interests are too mainstream. I often find news stories I would like to read that are blocked for people from the UK and EU.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#763

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's why diversity of sources is the only way to escape censorship: No, it's a page out of the old fascist playbook where flooding the stage with propaganda generates enough confusion to help fascists further their hateful agenda. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance

Fascism means diversity of opinions, democracy means everyone is only allowed to have the opinions you want them to have?

Fascists in the original sense, Mussolini, didn't tolerate opposition.

I'm not sure about modern fascists, but US politics does look rather Kayfabe-y to me. Fake opposition, there for the purpose of being an opponent.

Of course then you get all the discourse about what even counts as fascism, and someone brings up that the origin of the word is the Roman "fasces" (bundle of sticks) and how that etymological root points to the concept of "strength through unity" which is also why the Lincoln memorial has Lincoln resting his hands on them[0] and why trade unions often use the "strength through unity" phrasing (and get annoyed/upset by the connection).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lincoln_Memorial_statue_a...

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#764

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole book banning thing is a little weird in 2026, IMO. It's exciting to think about, we all liked Fahrenheit 451, but a book not being bought for elementary schools doesn't really make it "banned" IMO. There are a lot of books which probably shouldn't be in schools. I don't think children should be given copies of Mein Kampf or Camp of Saints, nor the random dark fantasy novels which are so popular today. It fe…

As a parent, I believe there is no book that should be banned from being used by a teacher for instruction. I have the responsibility of ensuring that the school my child attends employs teachers who I trust to make effective and age-appropriate curriculum decisions.

> I believe there is no book that should be banned from being used by a teacher for instruction

This is an insane opinion. In the same way, I care about what movies, music, YouTube videos my children consume because they all can have a massive impact on a child's development.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#765
post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trade and tarriff relief are an option still. Despite how shitty the US has been and the distrust that will cause in the future access to US markets will be very attractive until the economy collapses. Soft power isn't just from countries liking you after all.

Access to US market? Is that a joke you are trying to crack? An “access” that literally depends upon how loud the orange fool farted on the commode that morning — that access and that market? I mean do you really not see what’s happening or you are just being a nice contrarian? Because this baffles me.

It's still a very rich market and I'm mostly looking to a post Trump world. I completely understand other countries are going to be much more dubious about giving things up permanently for long term promises but things like not blocking sites or allowing US access to the markets both of which can be easily in response to another Trump-esque flailing is a much easier ask and negotiation.

I'm not saying things will return to the pre-Trump semi-hegemony but I do think it's over the top to think the US economy will have zero soft power in the years after Trump too.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#766

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a parent, I believe there is no book that should be banned from being used by a teacher for instruction. I have the responsibility of ensuring that the school my child attends employs teachers who I trust to make effective and age-appropriate curriculum decisions.

> I believe there is no book that should be banned from being used by a teacher for instruction This is an insane opinion. In the same way, I care about what movies, music, YouTube videos my children consume because they all can have a massive impact on a child's development.

OP posted a super short 2 sentence post and yet you managed to take that out of context and twist it into the exact opposite of what they meant. Incredible. I don't think OP is the one with the insane opinions.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#767
post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US's low press freedom index is precisely because people are being legally intimidated for wrongthink. It is not limited to the press, either. Mahmoud Khalil (the Palestinian activist detained by ICE on fake immigration charges for his political speech) is a famous example, but there are many. The US's "commitment to free speech" is nowadays not very much more noble than Russia's principled stand against economic…

False equivalency. As a green card holder he does not share the same freedom of speech rights as that of a US citizen.

Do I need to point out that the OP describes a US commitment to the free speech of Europeans?

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#768

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At the very least I know you have censored search results as that is an EU wide requirement of the right to be forgotten. How is the right to be forgotten a bad thing exactly? You can't request a news article be deleted if you're a prominent public figure for obvious reasons, but if you're a random Joe Schmoe then being able to force companies to take down things they've collected about you is a good thing. And are…

> How is the right to be forgotten a bad thing exactly? You can't request a news article be deleted if you're a prominent public figure for obvious reasons, Criminals and politicians have used it to get removed from search results. The news article might be there, but no one will find it. > I'm sure it's not the only EU country to not block anything, even though corrupt idiots in Spain and Italy also exist. Exactly m…

> Criminals and politicians have used it to get removed from search results. The news article might be there, but no one will find it.

Sure, there have doubtlessly been some cases of people abusing it, but that's an argument for refining how the law works, not scrapping the right entirely. The alternative is just "companies can collect and display whatever they want about anyone forever with zero recourse," which is obviously worse. If anything the fix is clearer rules about who qualifies, not throwing the whole thing out.

> Exactly my point. You cannot generalise about the EU and say "it does not happen in the EU"

Fair enough, and I'll concede that. But the same goes the other way, you can't make a blanket statement like "websites in the EU are censored/blocked" when that's simply not true in every EU country. Most people on HN talk about "The EU" like it's a singular borg entity with identical laws across the board, which it isn't.

> So, to be clear, you think its good that people in the EU cannot read some news sources?

The sites choosing not to serve EU users is on them, not the EU. The GDPR doesn't say "block European visitors," it says "if you collect their data, follow these rules." The sites are making a business decision that compliance isn't worth it, which again just tells you everything about how central harvesting user data is to their whole operation. If a news site is literally non-functional without hoovering up your personal data without consent, that's not the EU's fault, and frankly no one should be giving these privacy ruining entities anything anyways if that's the case.

You can't dump chemicals into the water table just because proper disposal is inconvenient and expensive, why do we suddenly clutch our pearls when the same logic is applied to people's privacy?

> Maybe your interests are too mainstream. I often find news stories I would like to read that are blocked for people from the UK and EU.

I read pretty niche stuff and have never once hit a wall here in NL. What specifically are you being blocked from? It's not something I've ever run into.

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#769

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump's Truth Social feed? The Vice President spreading racist lies about Hatians eating neighbor's pets on national television?

[flagged]

> And no, saying things like “read his tweets/NYT/whatever yourself” is not evidence.

Given he's the president, if Trump's own tweets don't count, what possibly could?

Re: US plans online portal to bypass content bans in Europe and elsewhere

#770
post #748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You want concrete proof? Vasquez Perdomo v Noem is your proof. The Supreme Court effectively legitimised racial profiling.

> You want concrete proof? Yes. > Vasquez Perdomo v Noem is your proof. This court case has nothing to do with the claim made that US government explicitly stated that they want to promote racists and fringe-right ideology among our allies.

The court case established the ability for ICE to go and harass anyone who they think looks like they're potentially a migrant. Hmm, I wonder what they'll use to profile those people...
Post reply on HN