5 ms·
The official version is that Telegram was used by terrorists who blew up the metro in Saint Petersburg. The real reason is more simple: it's mostly used by the
by y_molodtsov 9y ago
The official version is that Telegram was used by terrorists who blew up the metro in Saint Petersburg.
The real reason is more simple: it's mostly used by the small middle class, people working in tech and business. The current laws in Russia were used to block LinkedIn, but they didn't touch Facebook or Twitter — that would be too much.
- ktta 9y agoWouldn't this move just make then move to WhatsApp and eventually beg the same question as the parent comment?
- y_molodtsov 9y agoIt could be, but much more people use WhatsApp in Russia, people like my parents who haven't noticed any laws against the free internet before. They don't touch Signal or anything else as well.
- 3pt14159 9y agoWhatsApp has lots of clients for the shitty phones poor people use and a ton of Russians use WhatsApp. It's also possible that some implementations of these WhatsApp apps or the phones that host them are hacked, while others are not so it could be less of a binary distinction than one might assume.
- macspoofing 9y ago>it's mostly used by the small middle class, people working in tech and business. And terrorists. That use-case doesn't disappear.
- mjburgess 9y agoIt does when they switch apps and the other users can't legally do so.
- chupasaurus 9y agoTerrorists breath air, therefore we should ban air for everyone?
- xkarga00 9y agoGenerally, I try to avoid criticising others but this logic is really disturbing and dangerous and I am very worried about people who stand behind it. It hasn't gotten us anywhere. It never will.
- dexen 9y agoNonsense. Terrorists do use the air to convey voice; air is their primary communication medium for propagating their terrible ideas, and arranging their despicable plans. If we denied them access to air, to stop their voice communication, it would severely limit their ability to harm us. Isn't saving even just one child's life worth it? And don't worry about the terrorists without air not being able to talk about the legal, daily matters. Relevant institutions are already equipped to handle deaf and mute people. They could also just use internet or other service. Just deny them air so they can't talk, okay? It's the common sense solution. /s Slippery slope is a thing, especially when actors with under-handed intentions ask for simplistic, ham-fisted solutions. Once a precedent is established for censorship or snooping, it's pretty hard to draw, and defend, a line in the sand.
- xkarga00 9y agoDoes this mean that we should sit back and enjoy the show because "actors with under-handed intentions" and "precedent"s? Wake up. We can only get through collectively.
- reitanqild 9y ago> Does this mean that we should sit back and enjoy the show because "actors with under-handed intentions" and "precedent"s? No. > We can only get through collectively. Yep, but we shouldn't do it by throwing away the freedom we try to defend
- stevo111 9y agoFecebook was told to localize data in Russia and complied, same as twitter. thus allowed to operate. Small or large company makes no difference.