5 ms·

I am Russian, and I do not use Telegram, I and do not really know the technology that it relies on, so my opinion is probably worthless, but I can't get rid of

I am Russian, and I do not use Telegram, I and do not really know the technology that it relies on, so my opinion is probably worthless, but I can't get rid of the feeling that if Telegram just left the scene quietly and peacefully when the Russian authorities announced the ban, things would have been much simpler and yes, better. The authorities would have pretended that their mission had been accomplished. People who still really needed Telegram could continue to use it with the help of proxies or vpns. And the mayhem that occurred when the Russian internet watchdog started blocking millions of IPs would never have happened. Instead we had this ridiculous escalation causing the disruption of the normal internet communications for a while, and promising even more sinister problems in the future. And Gitbooks still don't work properly here :-(

village-idiot 8y ago
I think it's in Telegrams best interest to make a big deal out of this. More positively, not going quietly into the night when faced with state repression is pretty much in line with their ideals. I can totally see why they'd want to fight it out. On the cynical side, grand standing here is great for PR.
- azangru 8y ago
  > I think it's in Telegrams best interest to make a big deal out of this. > On the cynical side, grand standing here is great for PR. Totally, I get this. Pavel Durov even issued a statement at some point saying that Telegram's will keep defying the Russian authorities having the best interest of their users in mind. A veritable Robin Hood, wouldn't you know. I can't imagine how breaking of half the Internet that ensued could have been in the best interest of the public.
  - vezycash 8y ago
    Telegram didn't break the internet. The government did.
    - azangru 8y ago
      No argument there. The government did. In response to Telegram's stance. I mean, we know that the government (the Russian government in particular, or the government in general) is evil. Do we want to unleash their evil upon ourselves, that's what I am asking.
      - infinity0 8y ago
        They already "unleashed their evil" and it was shown to be pretty ineffective, lol
      - konart 8y ago
        >Do we want to unleash their evil upon ourselves, that's what I am asking. Yes we, who are not slaves, do want this if this is what it takes to get freedom.
anonymfus 8y ago
That is some Stockholm syndrome thinking. I am Russian and I like this escalation because it makes more people to hate Putin making overthrow of his regime more likely.
- azangru 8y ago
  > That is some Stockholm syndrome thinking. Stockholm syndrome is a feeling of affection towards your captor. I do not feel the slightest bit of affection towards our government. I despise them. But I do feel it may be in the captive's interest not to annoy the captor too much; better yet, not to attract his attention at all.
  - zzzcpan 8y ago
    Your captor is constantly looking for excuses to escalate things. There is nothing you can do to keep things the way they are.
    - azangru 8y ago
      It is a matter of belief, I suppose :-) One can believe in the reality where the captor is constantly thinking of how to provoke the captive and then destroy him, or in the reality where the captor is minding his own business until he is provoked. The Russia of the first decade of the 2000s rather resembled this second reality. Whether the reality has switched to the first one, I am not sure.
      - zzzcpan 8y ago
        At this point it's not a belief, but a historical record. The whole thing started small with "protect the children" kind of bullshit. Then gradually and consistently escalated to gain more power.
  - anonymfus 8y ago
    OK my word choice was wrong. >But I do feel it may be in the captive's interest not to annoy the captor too much; better yet, not to attract his attention at all. Only if there is an expectation that they will be released. If you are in the death camp then rebellion is your only actual chance. Because we have nuclear weapons no foreign government will interfere just to bring us democracy.
SEJeff 8y ago
So it is Telegram's fault for what your Government did? I'm sorry you have to live under this, but I think it is maybe the Government's fault for doing those things.
- azangru 8y ago
  > So it is Telegram's fault for what your Government did? It is not Telegram's fault that the Russian government decided to ban it. This unfortunate decision is wholly on the government. But it is not entirely clear to me whether it shares the blame for what happened next, namely for the collateral damage that occurred during their grand stand against the Russian government. I think it might actually be an interesting question worth pondering about.
  - SEJeff 8y ago
    Telegram did something the government didn't like, so the government tried to ban it and failed. All of the mess this caused is entirely the fault of the Russian Government, because Telegram didn't make these changes. I'd see thinking otherwise as a form of Victim Blaming: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming
    - azangru 8y ago
      > Telegram did something the government didn't like, so the government tried to ban it and failed. All of the mess this caused is entirely the fault of the Russian Government, because Telegram didn't make these changes. It is a very strange logic. Telegram did something that no longer was legal under the Russian law. Yes, it may be a stupid law, and yes, it may be very selectively applied, and yes, it is the government that gets to write the law and thus define the rules of the game. I get all that, and I share the hatred towards the Russian government and its legal system. Nevertheless, if we step aside and look at the situation disinterestedly, Telegram could no longer operate in Russia according to the laws of the land. So, according to the twisted Russian legal system, Telegram was in the wrong. It could have just acknowledged the fact and stopped operating in Russia. Instead its position was that it does not recognise the Russian ruling and will keep operating in the country where it officially was no longer welcome. The Russian authorities tried to enforce the law, but due to the lack of either grace or expertise made a mess out of it. Look, I am not arguing from a legalistic perspective. I do not worship the law, nor do I tell others to respect it. I would break it as likely as the next guy if I could get away with it. But what I am saying is that the Russian authorities were within their right. As for victim blaming, you would have been correct if we were discussing Telegram as the victim. But in my analysis, the victims are the public who had to endure broken internet, because a company and an enforcement agency were both making a point.
nradov 8y ago
Someone must have the moral courage to force the issue regardless of consequences. The situation will have to get worse before it can get better.
mushka 8y ago
Your arguments reminds me of Dolores Umbridge from Harry Potter.

village-idiot 8y ago

I think it's in Telegrams best interest to make a big deal out of this. More positively, not going quietly into the night when faced with state repression is pretty much in line with their ideals. I can totally see why they'd want to fight it out. On the cynical side, grand standing here is great for PR.

azangru 8y ago
> I think it's in Telegrams best interest to make a big deal out of this. > On the cynical side, grand standing here is great for PR. Totally, I get this. Pavel Durov even issued a statement at some point saying that Telegram's will keep defying the Russian authorities having the best interest of their users in mind. A veritable Robin Hood, wouldn't you know. I can't imagine how breaking of half the Internet that ensued could have been in the best interest of the public.
- vezycash 8y ago
  Telegram didn't break the internet. The government did.
  - azangru 8y ago
    No argument there. The government did. In response to Telegram's stance. I mean, we know that the government (the Russian government in particular, or the government in general) is evil. Do we want to unleash their evil upon ourselves, that's what I am asking.
    - infinity0 8y ago
      They already "unleashed their evil" and it was shown to be pretty ineffective, lol
    - konart 8y ago
      >Do we want to unleash their evil upon ourselves, that's what I am asking. Yes we, who are not slaves, do want this if this is what it takes to get freedom.

anonymfus 8y ago

That is some Stockholm syndrome thinking. I am Russian and I like this escalation because it makes more people to hate Putin making overthrow of his regime more likely.

azangru 8y ago
> That is some Stockholm syndrome thinking. Stockholm syndrome is a feeling of affection towards your captor. I do not feel the slightest bit of affection towards our government. I despise them. But I do feel it may be in the captive's interest not to annoy the captor too much; better yet, not to attract his attention at all.
- zzzcpan 8y ago
  Your captor is constantly looking for excuses to escalate things. There is nothing you can do to keep things the way they are.
  - azangru 8y ago
    It is a matter of belief, I suppose :-) One can believe in the reality where the captor is constantly thinking of how to provoke the captive and then destroy him, or in the reality where the captor is minding his own business until he is provoked. The Russia of the first decade of the 2000s rather resembled this second reality. Whether the reality has switched to the first one, I am not sure.
    - zzzcpan 8y ago
      At this point it's not a belief, but a historical record. The whole thing started small with "protect the children" kind of bullshit. Then gradually and consistently escalated to gain more power.
- anonymfus 8y ago
  OK my word choice was wrong. >But I do feel it may be in the captive's interest not to annoy the captor too much; better yet, not to attract his attention at all. Only if there is an expectation that they will be released. If you are in the death camp then rebellion is your only actual chance. Because we have nuclear weapons no foreign government will interfere just to bring us democracy.

SEJeff 8y ago

So it is Telegram's fault for what your Government did? I'm sorry you have to live under this, but I think it is maybe the Government's fault for doing those things.

azangru 8y ago
> So it is Telegram's fault for what your Government did? It is not Telegram's fault that the Russian government decided to ban it. This unfortunate decision is wholly on the government. But it is not entirely clear to me whether it shares the blame for what happened next, namely for the collateral damage that occurred during their grand stand against the Russian government. I think it might actually be an interesting question worth pondering about.
- SEJeff 8y ago
  Telegram did something the government didn't like, so the government tried to ban it and failed. All of the mess this caused is entirely the fault of the Russian Government, because Telegram didn't make these changes. I'd see thinking otherwise as a form of Victim Blaming: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victim_blaming
  - azangru 8y ago
    > Telegram did something the government didn't like, so the government tried to ban it and failed. All of the mess this caused is entirely the fault of the Russian Government, because Telegram didn't make these changes. It is a very strange logic. Telegram did something that no longer was legal under the Russian law. Yes, it may be a stupid law, and yes, it may be very selectively applied, and yes, it is the government that gets to write the law and thus define the rules of the game. I get all that, and I share the hatred towards the Russian government and its legal system. Nevertheless, if we step aside and look at the situation disinterestedly, Telegram could no longer operate in Russia according to the laws of the land. So, according to the twisted Russian legal system, Telegram was in the wrong. It could have just acknowledged the fact and stopped operating in Russia. Instead its position was that it does not recognise the Russian ruling and will keep operating in the country where it officially was no longer welcome. The Russian authorities tried to enforce the law, but due to the lack of either grace or expertise made a mess out of it. Look, I am not arguing from a legalistic perspective. I do not worship the law, nor do I tell others to respect it. I would break it as likely as the next guy if I could get away with it. But what I am saying is that the Russian authorities were within their right. As for victim blaming, you would have been correct if we were discussing Telegram as the victim. But in my analysis, the victims are the public who had to endure broken internet, because a company and an enforcement agency were both making a point.

nradov 8y ago

Someone must have the moral courage to force the issue regardless of consequences. The situation will have to get worse before it can get better.

mushka 8y ago

Your arguments reminds me of Dolores Umbridge from Harry Potter.