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

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

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 1001 posts

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

#791

Post by pousada »

Helmut10001 wrote: post #492
schoen wrote: post #38

I just chaired a session at the FOCI conference earlier today, where people were talking about Internet censorship circumvention technologies and how to prevent governments from blocking them. I'd like to remind everyone that the U.S. government has been one the largest funders of that research for decades. Some of it is under USAGM (formerly BBG, the parent of RFE/RL) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agen…

This is somewhat counterintuitive: The US is the only country I know where most newspapers and government services use strict geoblocks to prevent me from accessing US sites in Europe. Conversely, I've never had any problems accessing European sites from the US. I know this is for a different set of reasons (likely GDPR cookie law or similar), but it's funny that anyone thinks blocks like this are relevant. Most peop…

Only EU site I had a problem accessing that i can remember was from my electricity provider. Strangely enough they didn’t geoblock me but login threw an error because my local time didn’t match the local (German) timezone.

I changed my system timezone to Germany and it worked without issues, so I was wondering if it’s a very bad geoblock or something else entirely

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

#792

Post by anon291 »

blell wrote: post #688
pms wrote: post #434

It's a waste of resources, but please do it! The entire "European Union censors" narrative is a hoax [1], so the portal will achieve nothing, but you've got to do what you've got to do! [1] First, the EU countries have much higher World Press Freedom Index than the US. Second, once you start reading how little there is of the alleged "censorship" in the EU, you realize it's a no-brainer aiming to protect people.

Russia Today is blocked in the EU. Yes I know you’ll tell me it’s for my own good. Spare me.

But don't worry their press freedom index is higher according to themselves!.

"We ranked ourselves and found we were number one!"

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

#793

Post by Ajedi32 »

Helmut10001 wrote: post #492
schoen wrote: post #38

I just chaired a session at the FOCI conference earlier today, where people were talking about Internet censorship circumvention technologies and how to prevent governments from blocking them. I'd like to remind everyone that the U.S. government has been one the largest funders of that research for decades. Some of it is under USAGM (formerly BBG, the parent of RFE/RL) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Agen…

This is somewhat counterintuitive: The US is the only country I know where most newspapers and government services use strict geoblocks to prevent me from accessing US sites in Europe. Conversely, I've never had any problems accessing European sites from the US. I know this is for a different set of reasons (likely GDPR cookie law or similar), but it's funny that anyone thinks blocks like this are relevant. Most peop…

It makes sense to me. They're blocked in Europe because of European government polices, not American ones.

Maybe there's some sort of legal immunity the US government could grant to domestic sites which would allow them to lift those blocks without fear of reprisal?

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

#794

Post by 0xy »

codethief wrote: post #226
0xy wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? You're saying the German Chancellor does not represent the German government? [1] Large swathes of the CDU support it as well. Macron was responding to criticism of the Digital Services Act, which contains censorship provisions for 'hate speech', which is repeatedly and routinely used by European nations to crack down on protected political speech. For example, it has been used as an excuse to censor political v…

> the Digital Services Act […] The UK in particular You do realize that the UK is not part of the EU? So I'm not sure how UK's supposed "weaponization" of Ofcom has anything to do with Macron's statement. > which is repeatedly and routinely used by European nations to crack down on protected political speech. I'm really looking forward to your sources here. The DSA does not contain any provisions that change anything…

Original OP clearly said "Europe", not the EU.

As for the DSA censorship, I don't think you've read it.

https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/foreign-cen...

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

#795

Post by lucasRW »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #637
lucasRW wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does. That's why GrapheneOS left France; Signal is considering doing so to if ChatControl passes. Von Der Leyen and Breton clearly mentioned the possibility of banning X. And there are many other "signals". But yeah we get it, there's bad censorhip (Iran, China, Russia), and there is the good censorhip, sorry, i meant "protection of children", when it's the EU. :o)

> there's bad censorhip (Iran, China, Russia), and there is the good censorhip I understand that you're being facetious here, but this is literally true. Words kill people sometimes, and in the same way that my right to swing my arm stops where your nose begins your right to say whatever you want stops where my safety begins. Or to rephrase it, nobody can have free speech at all if others are allowed to threaten your…

I dont need Thierry Breton or Van Der Leyen to tell me which podcasts I am allowed to listened to, but thanks for the well-intentionned thoughts for my safety anyway.

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

#796

Post by Ajedi32 »

subpixel wrote: post #728
joenot443 wrote: post #712

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.

So you're saying if a teacher decides to use a book in class that's wholly inappropriate for the age group they're teaching we should ban the teacher, not the book?

I suppose that makes sense. But if the book in question is still available in the school library for any 7 year old to read or check out isn't that still a potential problem?

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

#797

Post by reliabilityguy »

Angostura wrote: post #775
reliabilityguy wrote: post #699

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> very explicitly stated goals of sowing discord within the US's former "allies", to weaken Europe, and to promote racist and fringe-right views. The US government explicitly said that they seek to promote racist and fringe-right views? Do you have any sort of evidence to back it up?

Is this the sort of thing you are looking for? https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/14/us/politics/vance-far-rig...

I’ve read the article and I do not see any evidence to the original claim. Where did Vance say that he supports racist ideologies? Being anti-immigration is not racist.

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

#798

Post by reliabilityguy »

pousada wrote: post #786
reliabilityguy wrote: post #760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I don’t know about the rest of Europe but your administration has repeatedly been promoting the AFD in Germany - most prominently your vice president. The AFD is recognised as a far right party by the German state and is being investigated for anti-democratic activities and goals.

Sure, but it is not the same thing as explicitly promoting racist and fringe-right ideas.

JD Vance may have voiced support (I didn’t listen to his speech) for conservative or right-wing political forces in Europe, but it is not the same as promoting explicitly racist and fringe-right ideas. There is a night and day difference between the original claim, and the evidence presented.

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

#799

Post by reliabilityguy »

vel0city wrote: post #770
reliabilityguy wrote: post #760

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

And this domestic ruling is, in your view, an evidence of the “very explicitly stated goals of sowing discord within the US's former "allies", to weaken Europe, and to promote racist and fringe-right views.”?

You can’t be serious. The original claim is about the foreign policy of US government to promote racist ideologies, and your “proof” is a ruling about constitutionality of using race and language as a indicator to investigate someone’s immigration status?

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

#800

Post by reliabilityguy »

ben_w wrote: post #769
reliabilityguy wrote: post #739

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[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?

Show me the tweet please this is all I am asking
Post reply on HN