Skip Navigation

Posts
1
Comments
119
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • No offense, but keep your patronizing “Anyone who disagrees with me could only have just heard of this article I just skimmed, and not been discussing it in depth for the last week” bullshit out of my replies.

    So, the EFF has 33 years of experience fighting in courts on matters of digital rights, and somehow you feel like you know both the current law and the legal consequences of court precedents better than them?

    Based on how composed you've been in this comment section, I'm going to assume the EFF has been around longer than you have.

  • Could you please read the whole article before commenting?

    It’s incredibly easy for an ISP to point out that they’re not going to block a network for a different reason by pointing out it’s… not the same reason.

    No offense, but don't pursue a law degree, that's not how things work in the real world. The EFF has a long history of fighting these sorts of things in court, they have enough experienced people to know what they are talking about.

    A state has enough leverage to push around an ISP to comply, and the ISP gains nothing in opposing.

    The EFF deserves to be roundly condemned for this, especially as it has no obvious alternative.

    There is. People can be prosecuted individually. This has happened in the past without ISPs blocking whole websites.

    The position is intellectually dishonest unless you’re actually pro-killing-transgender people.

    Speaking of fallacies...

  • Or I could… not base my views on history entirely off of Wikipedia articles?

    So... first you believe Wikipedia, now you don't, based on whichever articles suit your views?

  • The Irish Famine was a genocide, because it was intentional. I should’ve clarified I mean that famines can be genocides, but are not inherently genocidal.

    I’ll note that your own source says in the very first line:

    While scholars are in consensus that the cause of the famine was man-made, whether the Holodomor constitutes a genocide remains in dispute

    Here's a quote from the Irish Famine (same source: wikipedia)

    Virtually all historians reject the claim that the British government's response to the famine constituted a genocide, their position is partially based on the fact that with regard to famine related deaths, there was a lack of intent to commit genocide.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Famine_(Ireland)#Genocide_question

    So you have two options:

    1. You either accept both as a genocide

    2. Or you basically pick-and-choose based on whichever country was responsible for the genocide.

    My guess is that you'll take the second option.

  • Famines are not genocides lol. Though I suppose you could make the case that the embargo on the USSR caused a lot of excess deaths. Famines were extremely common before the USSR took power because it was a pre-industrial society, the USSR ended that. Also, the USSR is a completely different government from the Russian Federation.

    How do you feel about the Irish Famine?

  • lmao Russia had nothing at all to do with January 6th buddy, that was all Trump

    I wonder where Trump got his support from. 🤔

  • The Russian anti-war activists are clearly holding up their end of the bargain. Why are you not holding up yours?

    Ah! To be young and naive enough to believe that the anti-war activists in Russia have any leverage. They will all end up in Siberia or jumping out of a window.

    Any regime change in Russia will come from the oligarchs, and the Russian working class will still be in a bad position (if not worse).

  • In both cases there was Russian meddling involved.

    I guess Ukrainians are just better at rioting?

  • Ukraine's parliament had overwhelmingly approved of finalizing the Agreement with the EU, but Russia had put pressure on Ukraine to reject it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euromaidan

    How is this in any shape or form analogous to the Jan 6th?

  • I disagree that the previous government was a puppet government.

    Of course you do, that's my point.

    Tankies will support whichever government aligns with a power that is not the US. Even if that power is a capitalist oligarchy like Russia.

    The US has a long history of installing far-right governments, has an atrocious record of human rights, and violates sovereignty left and right

    They do, but the enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.

    Specially when you take into account what Russia has done. They have a long history of erasing East European cultures (i.e. Russification), and genocide. So I do not trust them when it comes to Eastern European affairs, and neither do native people from those countries, most of support for Russia in those areas comes from Russian minorities (I wonder how they got there).

  • You did not answer my question.

    Did you support the Ukrainians rebelling against their government back in 2013. Or do you only support a side if that side happens to oppose the US?

  • Vietnam was opposing a puppet government imposed by the US.

    The Ukrainians opposed a Russian puppet government in 2013.

    Do you support both Vietnam and Ukraine?

  • Are you aware that it’s possible to want neither NATO tanks nor Russian tanks in Ukraine?

    I am.

    But do you believe Ukraine is able to maintain their territory protected from Russia without NATO's weapon supply?

  • There are two imperialist blocs involved in the conflict, and it doesn’t matter which one of them technically started it.

    I'm sorry, but when it involves one imperialist bloc invading a smaller country, then it does matter.

    Do you have the same position regarding the Vietnam war, Palestine, Iraq, and Afghanistan? Or do you only support whichever side is not aligned with the US?

  • To the ones down-voting this comment.

    People keep piling up on the EFF without reading that article.

    Once an ISP indicates it’s willing to police content by blocking traffic, more pressure from other quarters will follow, and they won’t all share your views or values. For example, an ISP, under pressure from the attorney general of a state that bans abortions, might decide to interfere with traffic to a site that raises money to help people get abortions, or provides information about self-managed abortions. Having set a precedent in one context, it is very difficult for an ISP to deny it in another, especially when even considering the request takes skill and nuance. We all know how lousy big user-facing platforms like Facebook are at content moderation—and that’s with significant resources. Tier 1 ISPs don’t have the ability or the incentive to build content evaluation teams that are even as effective as those of the giant platforms who know far more about their end users and yet still engage in harmful censorship.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/isps-should-not-police-online-speech-no-matter-how-awful-it

    The EFF supports prosecuting Kiwi Farms, they are just opposed to the dangerous precedent an ISP block sets.

  • The EFF supported the prosecution of people from Kiwi Farms for their activities, just opposed their website to be taken out at the ISP level. I feel a lot of people jumped on the EFF without reading the full article.

    Once an ISP indicates it’s willing to police content by blocking traffic, more pressure from other quarters will follow, and they won’t all share your views or values. For example, an ISP, under pressure from the attorney general of a state that bans abortions, might decide to interfere with traffic to a site that raises money to help people get abortions, or provides information about self-managed abortions. Having set a precedent in one context, it is very difficult for an ISP to deny it in another, especially when even considering the request takes skill and nuance. We all know how lousy big user-facing platforms like Facebook are at content moderation—and that’s with significant resources. Tier 1 ISPs don’t have the ability or the incentive to build content evaluation teams that are even as effective as those of the giant platforms who know far more about their end users and yet still engage in harmful censorship.

    https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/isps-should-not-police-online-speech-no-matter-how-awful-it

  • Russian pacifists want Russia to stop invading Ukraine.

    Lemmygrad / Hexbear pacifists want Ukraine to appease Russia and give up territory.

    They are not the same.