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

881–890 of 1001 posts

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

#881

Post by ImJamal »

syspec wrote: post #344

Meanwhile, you can't even go on pornhub in certain states in the US, but yes let's let people go on X and engage in hate speech. In fact I'm sure bad actors will use that site FROM the us, to anonymize their hate speech from Russia/China

No state blocks access to PornHub. Some states have requirements requiring ID before viewing porn, but the state isn't stopping anybody from viewing it.

Requiring ID to buy alcohol isn't banning alcohol, just like requiring ID to view porn isn't banning porn.

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

#883

Post by ben_w »

dmm wrote: post #868
ben_w wrote: post #694

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kinda irrelevant, given that the go-to examples I see on Hacker News of this happening in the EU and UK are either actual death/violence threats etc. (which are also not protected speech in the USA) or also not upheld in higher European courts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...

Incitement is only illegal when "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action".

And? I didn't say anything about "incitement", I said "actual death/violence threats", because I meant people making actual threats of violence up to and including death, are the actual things tweeted in the most commonly seen examples given on Hacker News (besides the aforementioned "also not upheld" that the commenter I was replying to tried to use to justify when Americans get arrested for tweets).

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

#884

Post by Eezee »

xdennis wrote: post #862
duckerduck wrote: post #630

Maybe the EU can open a book portal for the US. https://pen.org/report/the-normalization-of-book-banning/

The banned books are things like "All Boys Aren't Blue", a book which describes incestuous child rape and provides step by step instructions for anal sex. If you think that book belongs in public schools the FBI should have a look at your computer.

It describes incestuous child rape, because the author describes his experience of being raped. Victims speaking about their abuse, now that is one step too far and needs to be censored.

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

#885

Post by calmworm »

stinkbeetle wrote: post #362
calmworm wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A rose by any other name…

That didn't answer my question.

But it did. Calling something what it is doesn’t matter one way or another. It is still what it is.

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

#886

Post by joe463369 »

account42 wrote: post #705
locknitpicker wrote: post #578

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?

Democracy is having the laws Americans approve of, because God wrote their Constitution.

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

#888

Post by dmix »

hsuduebc2 wrote: post #843
Waterluvian wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a clear way to project soft power: make sure your message and culture can get through.

American culture can access Europeans at any time. Europeans consume American culture daily.Just to clarify. Website banned are often hostile propaganda or extremists. This is only cringy lousy provocation for appearance of moral superiority. Coming from a government notorious for spying on it's citizens it seems pretty ludicrous.

Europe should just create their own social media companies where the government can act as a moderator of content then.

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

#889

Post by lovich »

lostmsu wrote: post #785
iso1631 wrote: post #692

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yet the US president unilaterally shut down Voice of America because he didn't like its message Freedom of speech for me, not for thee

> US president unilaterally The whole truth here would be that technically he did not do it unilaterally but as a representative of his voters, so basically almost as far from unilaterally as possible.

That is not what unilaterally means when the US government takes action. It means none of the other decision makers or branches were involved.

Don’t be obtuse

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

#890

Post by Aurornis »

coliveira wrote: post #314
Aurornis wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You think there's an entire shadow infrastructure across the United States or world that carries 80% of all internet traffic all the way to VA? It would have to be several times larger than the internet infrastructure itself due to the distances involved. All built and maintained in secret?

You just don't have imagination. Google, just by itself, controls 89% of the traffic in the Internet. And we know that the government can get any information they want from them, without even asking too much. If you combine this with other major companies operating very close to the US government, it is probable that more than 95% of the web traffic outside China that is easily within reach of these sinister 3 letter…

> Google, just by itself, controls 89% of the traffic in the Internet.

This is completely false and it should be obvious to anyone thinking about it critically.

Are you confusing search engine query share with internet traffic?

Post reply on HN