8 ms·

Incredible that so many tech types are now cheering on the government blocking websites.

by synarchefriend 2y ago

bamboozled 2y ago
[flagged]
- YPCrumble 2y ago
  You are quite literally saying that you support censorship.
  - bamboozled 2y ago
    I don't know why people get so "twitchy" about this topic, what don't you understand about this situation being unique in history? I didn't say I support this level of censorship. I'm just smart enough and sympathetic enough to see how the platform causes issues for democracy and how this is a hard thing to grapple with for western democratic society. Smart people are using our morality against us and plenty of people fall for it. Everyone I know that seriously uses Twitter, I've basically distanced myself from. It's an insane platform. Twitter is not a "website". I say it again.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - Sebb767 2y ago
      > what don't you understand about this situation being unique in history? Because this exact argument is brought every single time someone supports censorship. Free speech is easy to support when you agree with what is being said, what matters is what happens when you disagree. > I'm just smart enough and sympathetic enough to see how the platform causes issues for democracy and how this is a hard thing to grapple with for western democratic society. Smart people are using our morality against us and plenty of people fall for it. And other smart people tell us that "actually, we do kinda need to subvert our values in this case, trust me". Now, I do see that there are shades of gray, but Twitter is far from a radical platform (we're not talking about KiwiFarms here) and, usually, when you're right, you don't need to win by silencing the other sides arguments.
      - bamboozled 2y ago
        Online anonymous platforms are very different to the free speech required to run and live in a democratic society. Twitter is a platform and social media is a technology. It's a cheap form of influence and is being used as a backdoor into our value systems and the narratives we use to understand our world. You're anti-censorship. Do you think it would be ok then if a website offer rape porn? or child abuse images? Wouldn't not allowing that being on TV be a form of censorship too? This isn't hiding books from you about astronomy or stopping you from getting an abortion it's grappling with scams, illegal contraband sales, child porn rackets, foreign electoral interference, information wars and more. If we as a society find that a specific technology is causing actual harm to our society then we need to have discussions about how those technologies should be used and accessed and regulated. We can't just let our shit get broken because "censorship". Yes, this is a difficult thing to deal with because it's not easy for the reason you state. Twitter is not a town square and even in a real life town square,sometimes the police have to get involved when shit gets out of hand...are you frustrated about that also? In the actual town square, you need to actual make effort and put your true self on display to exercise your right to free speech. Twitter is a joke compared to that.
        Sebb767 2y ago
        > Twitter is a platform and social media is a technology. It's a cheap form of influence and is being used as a backdoor into our value systems and the narratives we use to understand our world. No disagreement there. > You're anti-censorship Very much so, yes. > Do you think it would be ok then if a website offer rape porn? or child abuse images? Wouldn't not allowing that being on TV be a form of censorship too? It's absolutely a form of censorship, but (obviously) not one I disagree with. > If we as a society find that a specific technology is causing actual harm to our society then we need to have discussions about how those technologies should be used and accessed and regulated. We can't just let our shit get broken because "censorship". Yes, I'm with you as far as "we need to discuss this" and "this might be a problem". > Twitter is not a town square and even in a real life town square,sometimes the police have to get involved when shit gets out of hand...are you frustrated about that also? In the actual town square, you need to actual make effort and put your true self on display to exercise your right to free speech. Twitter is a joke compared to that. Well, except, to go with your metaphor, Brazil is saying "there are some drug dealers on the town square, let's just completely block it off and forbid meeting there altogether". Squashing innocent political meetings of your opponents might be an unfortunate side effect, but what can you do. Just to be clear, I'm not at all a fan of Twitter. But it is a moderated platform and it's far from distributing the horrible stuff that we both agree should be censored [0]. It's not a shining diamond of intelligent discourse, but it's not in any way an extremist platform and it unquestionably did help democracy by helping normal broadcast the crimes happening in their region. Blocking it is a horrible precedent and really throwing out the baby with the bathwater. [0] Yes, you will find examples of borderline tweets and horrible stuff that slipped through the filters, but that's to be expected for a platform of this size - in general, Twitter is comparatively tame and moderated.
__m 2y ago
Websites that don’t adhere to the laws of said government. If they don’t like it they can fight it in a court of law, not on twitter
- ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
  Except when it happens in China, people _generally_ get upset at the company. When it's a company they hate, it seems people are more willing to look the other way.
  - SebastianKra 2y ago
    It's not the company, it's the values being enforced. Everyone was fine with Apple getting an antitrust case and also that fight with the EU. Generally, I believe that companies should never act against the laws of a country. If China orders a company to censor something, I'm mad at the government, not the company.
  - __m 2y ago
    No, the same principle applies here. China can choose what they allow in their country.
    - ricardorivaldo 2y ago
      it's not the case in Brazil, most issues requests to take down content are related to the usual nazi, pedo, violence threads and simple and plain lies proven by overwhelming contrary evidence , everything is open to discussion by the involved parties, no secret tribunal exist in brazil, like some us patriot act tribunals
CuriouslyC 2y ago
[flagged]
kranke155 2y ago
If a website breaks the law...
- Fidelix 2y ago
  They're doing the opposite. They are refusing the break the law and comply with illegal orders.
  - kranke155 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - goodluckchuck 2y ago
      A ruling of a court - even the highest court of the land - does not make something law. Courts get things wrong all the time.
      - kranke155 2y ago
        If you don't follow the rulings of courts you get arrested under their jurisdiction. I don't understand how this is controversial.
      - Hamuko 2y ago
        >A ruling of a court - even the highest court of the land - does not make something law. Isn't that precisely how common law legal systems work? There is a law but its definition isn't strictly that of what the books say but rather the judicial precedents made in relation to it?
        kranke155 2y ago
        [flagged]
      - deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
    - 2y ago
krisboyz781 2y ago
[dead]
thefz 2y ago
For world's most toxic cesspool "website" - yes. Yes, I am. Especially if latest tech bro's new toy is breaking some country's law.
- rbanffy 2y ago
  I'd say the various chan sites are still worse, but at least they don't pretend to be legitimate companies.
ricardorivaldo 2y ago
the site is not blocked, the question is not comply with brazilian law, if they comply the site will be unblocked, thats a simple and direct matter of not complying with a court order, is not up to twitter to decide what is legal or not in our country, is up to the juditiary branch of governement, Which is separated from executive branch, much like the US and all liberal democracies , the supreme court judges are appointed by the elected president, like in US, but they do not stay all life, must quit at 75 years old. The judge in question was appointed by a righ wing presidente in 2017, current presidente is a left wing from a oposite party.
rbanffy 2y ago
You mean "upholding the law", right?

Incredible that so many tech types are now cheering on the government blocking websites.

bamboozled 2y ago

[flagged]

YPCrumble 2y ago
You are quite literally saying that you support censorship.
- bamboozled 2y ago
  I don't know why people get so "twitchy" about this topic, what don't you understand about this situation being unique in history? I didn't say I support this level of censorship. I'm just smart enough and sympathetic enough to see how the platform causes issues for democracy and how this is a hard thing to grapple with for western democratic society. Smart people are using our morality against us and plenty of people fall for it. Everyone I know that seriously uses Twitter, I've basically distanced myself from. It's an insane platform. Twitter is not a "website". I say it again.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - Sebb767 2y ago
    > what don't you understand about this situation being unique in history? Because this exact argument is brought every single time someone supports censorship. Free speech is easy to support when you agree with what is being said, what matters is what happens when you disagree. > I'm just smart enough and sympathetic enough to see how the platform causes issues for democracy and how this is a hard thing to grapple with for western democratic society. Smart people are using our morality against us and plenty of people fall for it. And other smart people tell us that "actually, we do kinda need to subvert our values in this case, trust me". Now, I do see that there are shades of gray, but Twitter is far from a radical platform (we're not talking about KiwiFarms here) and, usually, when you're right, you don't need to win by silencing the other sides arguments.
    - bamboozled 2y ago
      Online anonymous platforms are very different to the free speech required to run and live in a democratic society. Twitter is a platform and social media is a technology. It's a cheap form of influence and is being used as a backdoor into our value systems and the narratives we use to understand our world. You're anti-censorship. Do you think it would be ok then if a website offer rape porn? or child abuse images? Wouldn't not allowing that being on TV be a form of censorship too? This isn't hiding books from you about astronomy or stopping you from getting an abortion it's grappling with scams, illegal contraband sales, child porn rackets, foreign electoral interference, information wars and more. If we as a society find that a specific technology is causing actual harm to our society then we need to have discussions about how those technologies should be used and accessed and regulated. We can't just let our shit get broken because "censorship". Yes, this is a difficult thing to deal with because it's not easy for the reason you state. Twitter is not a town square and even in a real life town square,sometimes the police have to get involved when shit gets out of hand...are you frustrated about that also? In the actual town square, you need to actual make effort and put your true self on display to exercise your right to free speech. Twitter is a joke compared to that.
      - Sebb767 2y ago
        > Twitter is a platform and social media is a technology. It's a cheap form of influence and is being used as a backdoor into our value systems and the narratives we use to understand our world. No disagreement there. > You're anti-censorship Very much so, yes. > Do you think it would be ok then if a website offer rape porn? or child abuse images? Wouldn't not allowing that being on TV be a form of censorship too? It's absolutely a form of censorship, but (obviously) not one I disagree with. > If we as a society find that a specific technology is causing actual harm to our society then we need to have discussions about how those technologies should be used and accessed and regulated. We can't just let our shit get broken because "censorship". Yes, I'm with you as far as "we need to discuss this" and "this might be a problem". > Twitter is not a town square and even in a real life town square,sometimes the police have to get involved when shit gets out of hand...are you frustrated about that also? In the actual town square, you need to actual make effort and put your true self on display to exercise your right to free speech. Twitter is a joke compared to that. Well, except, to go with your metaphor, Brazil is saying "there are some drug dealers on the town square, let's just completely block it off and forbid meeting there altogether". Squashing innocent political meetings of your opponents might be an unfortunate side effect, but what can you do. Just to be clear, I'm not at all a fan of Twitter. But it is a moderated platform and it's far from distributing the horrible stuff that we both agree should be censored [0]. It's not a shining diamond of intelligent discourse, but it's not in any way an extremist platform and it unquestionably did help democracy by helping normal broadcast the crimes happening in their region. Blocking it is a horrible precedent and really throwing out the baby with the bathwater. [0] Yes, you will find examples of borderline tweets and horrible stuff that slipped through the filters, but that's to be expected for a platform of this size - in general, Twitter is comparatively tame and moderated.

__m 2y ago

Websites that don’t adhere to the laws of said government. If they don’t like it they can fight it in a court of law, not on twitter

ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
Except when it happens in China, people _generally_ get upset at the company. When it's a company they hate, it seems people are more willing to look the other way.
- SebastianKra 2y ago
  It's not the company, it's the values being enforced. Everyone was fine with Apple getting an antitrust case and also that fight with the EU. Generally, I believe that companies should never act against the laws of a country. If China orders a company to censor something, I'm mad at the government, not the company.
- __m 2y ago
  No, the same principle applies here. China can choose what they allow in their country.
  - ricardorivaldo 2y ago
    it's not the case in Brazil, most issues requests to take down content are related to the usual nazi, pedo, violence threads and simple and plain lies proven by overwhelming contrary evidence , everything is open to discussion by the involved parties, no secret tribunal exist in brazil, like some us patriot act tribunals

CuriouslyC 2y ago

[flagged]

kranke155 2y ago

If a website breaks the law...

Fidelix 2y ago
They're doing the opposite. They are refusing the break the law and comply with illegal orders.
- kranke155 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - goodluckchuck 2y ago
    A ruling of a court - even the highest court of the land - does not make something law. Courts get things wrong all the time.
    - kranke155 2y ago
      If you don't follow the rulings of courts you get arrested under their jurisdiction. I don't understand how this is controversial.
    - Hamuko 2y ago
      >A ruling of a court - even the highest court of the land - does not make something law. Isn't that precisely how common law legal systems work? There is a law but its definition isn't strictly that of what the books say but rather the judicial precedents made in relation to it?
      - kranke155 2y ago
        [flagged]
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
  - 2y ago

krisboyz781 2y ago

[dead]

thefz 2y ago

For world's most toxic cesspool "website" - yes. Yes, I am. Especially if latest tech bro's new toy is breaking some country's law.

rbanffy 2y ago
I'd say the various chan sites are still worse, but at least they don't pretend to be legitimate companies.

ricardorivaldo 2y ago

the site is not blocked, the question is not comply with brazilian law, if they comply the site will be unblocked, thats a simple and direct matter of not complying with a court order, is not up to twitter to decide what is legal or not in our country, is up to the juditiary branch of governement, Which is separated from executive branch, much like the US and all liberal democracies , the supreme court judges are appointed by the elected president, like in US, but they do not stay all life, must quit at 75 years old. The judge in question was appointed by a righ wing presidente in 2017, current presidente is a left wing from a oposite party.

rbanffy 2y ago

You mean "upholding the law", right?