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

Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

euronews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 163 posts

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#91

Post by breadwinner »

atwrk wrote: post #30
ceejayoz wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Note that Elon Musk's definition of free speech includes anything that is not outright illegal... Unless it's @ElonJet tweeting. Or journalists tweeting about @ElonJet.

Or you mention gender using "cis": https://imgur.com/gallery/state-of-xitter-2024-kYonTt4 Making this a about about free speech is astounding in multiple ways. First, are people not aware that Brazil is a different sovereign nation, where the US idea of free speech may not apply? And a country with a military dictatorship not many years ago, with laws specifically in place to prevent another coup, which Twitter chose…

Germany prohibits certain types of speech, including Holocaust denial and hate speech, which are considered threats to public order and democratic values.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/jul/10/twitter-f...

"Twitter has become a space where antisemitism and Holocaust denial is just growing and growing."

I hope Germany is the next to ban.

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#93

Post by Marsymars »

timeon wrote: post #44
inglor_cz wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being able to read stuff written by other people is pretty close to a basic human right, though. At least in the liberal Western tradition.

I often can't read Twitter because I do not have account. Is my human right violated?

Well, I think it would be very reasonable for a government to compel Twitter to allow access without an account to at least certain accounts that dispense information that is of real-time public interest. e.g. In the case of some recent wildfires here, updates about the emergency were primarily available on Twitter.

The sanest implementation would probably just be some nominal monthly charge that an account holder can pay to Twitter to have their account publicly accessible to all.

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#94

Post by flykespice »

dark-star wrote: post #57
brianolson wrote: post #27

2 million new bsky accounts https://bsky.app/profile/bsky.app/post/3l36zm4e6ee2w

what keeps them from banning bsky too in the coming months?

By not enabling blatant (harmful) misinformation accounts to proliferate in the platform, just like X/Twitter did.

And of course, complying with the law and courts order

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#95

Post by mrcsharp »

KerrAvon wrote: post #47
BadHumans wrote: post #32

I'm not sure I agree with Brazil wanting to compel platforms to ban accounts and I don't agree with fining people who try to access the service and if Elon is to be believed, I really don't agree with threatening Twitter's legal rep with prison. Elon is also a hypocrite having done the exact thing Brazil is asking for with India and Turkey in the past and he clearly has no problem inventing reasons to ban people who…

Is there a reason to give Elon the benefit of the doubt for anything at this point?

Yes, it is called living in a civilized society.

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#96

Post by guhcampos »

ripjaygn wrote: post #90
guhcampos wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but you must be confusing what a legal representative is, or we are getting lost in translation here. The legal rep for Twitter in Brazil was not just some Lawyer defending Twitter in court. They were effectively the Owner and President of the Twitter subsidiary in Brazil, and as such are legally responsible for any and all dealings of the company in the country.

Is BlueSky required to have a legal rep?

Not yet, until they do, quite literally.

One of the principles Brazilian Law is based off is something called "Principle of Inertia" (which I can't find a proper translation since I keep stumbling into sixth grade Physics).

It reasons that the Juditiary Power will must not and does not have to act unless provoked to do so.

In practice, this means that while the law states that platforms operating in Brazil need a legal representative, that is not required or enforced until there's a reason to. In this case, it could be if anyone ever sues Bluesky, if they collect payments in local currency or transfer money in/out of the country, or if they provide a service that is regulated such as medical or financial advice.

So far, none of these have happened, or have not happened in a scale or frequency that has prompted action.

I expect that as people migrate over to Bluesky they will eventually be required to provide a representative or follow the fate of Twitter.

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#97

Post by BadHumans »

mrcsharp wrote: post #95
KerrAvon wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there a reason to give Elon the benefit of the doubt for anything at this point?

Yes, it is called living in a civilized society.

Well no, if someone is a habitual liar or always wrong, then you're free to assume they are lying or wrong. The ordinary opinion of random people is not a court of law where innocence is presumed.

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#98

Post by tmottabr »

ivewonyoung wrote: post #78
slater wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won't, cos it's STILL not censorship, much though the right-of-center machinery would love everyone to believe it is.

Ok, removal request then.

Bluesky have contact information in their site..

But Brazil justice is already in contact with then, as long as they offer a place for justice to send court orders and comply with then, as they have done so far, they wont have any problems..

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#99

Post by tmottabr »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #66
dark-star wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what keeps them from banning bsky too in the coming months?

Isn't Bluesky (I know nothing about it: heard about it for the first time on HN following the X ban in totalitarian Brazil) decentralized?

in theory it is.. but the only site that implement their protocol is bluesky.social

Re: Brazil Court votes unanimously to uphold X ban. Users switch to Threads, Bluesky

#100

Post by tmottabr »

wslh wrote: post #45
prepend wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also don’t want companies to have to have offices in every country where they operate. X is big enough but it’s silly of Brazil to require a literal physical presence. They can serve whatever they need electronically to wherever X is these days.

It may seem strange, at least to me, but the company Lumen Orbit (YCS24) [1] aims to offer data centers in space. If they, or another similar company, succeed in the future, it could change jurisdictional rules. [1] https://www.ycombinator.com/companies/lumen-orbit

not at all..

twitter servers are in the US yet they are having problems in brazil..

If server are in space and company refuse to abide to each country laws they will have the access to their servers blocked just the same..

Post reply on HN