foverzar

7 ms·

1.
by foverzar 2y ago
> In Russia, China or North Korea - nobody believes that. Well of course, they're all actually super miserable and are secretly begging the government of your country or her stronger allies to liberate them and wisely lead to a glor
2.
by foverzar 2y ago
> Telegram has also absolutely no filters Your own head should be your filter. This is literally craving for Big Brother. > so it can be filled with lies and propaganda without any response from the platform So does any other platform
3.
by foverzar 2y ago
> As did (does?) TOR Yep, TOR is not a solution for hiding from western governments. That's why anything large enough out there gets wrecked as soon as someone makes an appropriate decision.
4.
by foverzar 2y ago
> E.g. the claim that all ISPs simultaneously voluntarily decided to throttle Youtube to reduce foreign traffic > The information that all ISPs voluntarily decided to throttle Youtube is implausible > Also the information about mob
5.
by foverzar 2y ago
Government funding? Mandatory phone number exposure? (or did they finally implement usernames?) A joke of a "registration lock pin" instead a proper 2FA to protect against sim-swap?
6.
by foverzar 2y ago
It literally has government funding.
7.
by foverzar 2y ago
> Since 2022 it became nothing but a propaganda tool itself. How can it possibly be "a propaganda tool" when it has no feed, no algorithms, no suggestions or recommendations? You only get sources you've willingly subscribe
8.
by foverzar 2y ago
> And my intuition is that Telegram is going to become banned in Russia soon It had already happened with extreme humiliation of responsible agencies. > as Youtube is being banned now It's not banned, it's throttled because
9.
by foverzar 2y ago
Spoken like a person who had never ever accessed a single resources in Ru-net, nor interacted with people on their social media platforms.
10.
by foverzar 2y ago
> and the Russian govt has carte blanche access to Telegram That hardly corresponds with Durov's relationships and history with Russian government. > Russia invaded their sovereign neighbour Ukraine who the f cares about their fo
11.
by foverzar 2y ago
US is a no-go for a project like this. No large geopolitical power is.
12.
by foverzar 2y ago
> well, at least Signal Basically only Signal + Whatsapp. > claiming they don't do anything for privacy. Well, Signal is kind of a scam in that regard.
13.
by foverzar 2y ago
Large geopolitical powers are all the same. It's only people who live there that are convinced they are doing better than those other guys. Yes, that includes people from Russia, China or the US believing they are the ones who are trul
14.
by foverzar 2y ago
> I have yet to see evidence of this being a huge story for those people Can you honestly claim that you keep in touch with those people? I mean, this is an english-speaking us-centric forum. It is somewhat atypical for people here to ac
15.
by foverzar 2y ago
It's been collapsing since digital piracy had first appeared. Then perpetuated by countries being elective at what kind of "intellectual property" rights they choose to respect. "People with money" are a crucial mil
16.
by foverzar 2y ago
There is a whole wide world beyond just obsessing over "billionaires" in a tiny us-centric corner of the world. One could point out China, who totally has so much respect for someone's notion of legality. Or France that had n
17.
by foverzar 2y ago
Is it really? It's all boils down to powerplay, really. And lately lots of powerful entities, from nations to corporations, seem to be poised on disrupting this institution.
18.
by foverzar 2y ago
Well it's nice to see the whole concept of IP finally collapsing as it should.
19.
by foverzar 2y ago
> most commonly Says who?
20.
by foverzar 2y ago
> The only reason that's even considered is because the advertising industry No, it isn't. I've seen a lot of cases when 3rd party cookies were used in complex web based software, especially in enterprise software. This ma
21.
by foverzar 2y ago
> Yet, rich people buy Lamborghinis. Do they really? Seems more like a case for wannabe rich people.
22.
by foverzar 2y ago
It is misleading to go from patent infringement to casual theft. They're not the same.
23.
by foverzar 2y ago
Somehow people aren't that eager to make the same argument when accusing China of "IP theft".
24.
by foverzar 2y ago
They obviously can't just bail and this whole moody exclusivity is what's truly pathetic.
25.
by foverzar 2y ago
It is based on various attribution factors. But since it is typically easier to point at the currently hated scapegoat and be done with it, the quality of these attribution factors leaves much to be desired. E.g. https://blog.sek
26.
by foverzar 2y ago
I imagine the attribution factors were something along "we saw IPs associated with Russian ISPs and cloud providers" or "parts of their infra were accessible from Russia without using VPN".
27.
by foverzar 2y ago
Even Armenia didn't want to defend Armenia, making sure that it is explicitly legally and politically "definitely-not-Armenia" that needs defense.
28.
by foverzar 2y ago
> 0 other reasons Well this is just sad propaganda. Zelensky (and others) had publicly admitted to sabotaging deescalation agreements. You don't want to fall for "nothing happened in Donbas before 22" bs. It is really such
29.
by foverzar 2y ago
It wasn't just against China, they were campaigning against all non-western vaccines. Either you get Phizer/Astra-Zenka, or that evil Chinese/Russian/whatever liquid will make your eyes bleed out. It's not even a &q
30.
by foverzar 2y ago
How else something contradicting western propaganda is supposed to sound like? > all the fault of the horrible people pushing peace and democracy Please don't push this "nothing was happening in Donbas before 22". It'

More ›