5 ms·

You're exactly arguing from from a legalistic perspective.

azangru 8y ago
I am alternating between two perspectives: one is that of an internet user who was caught in a fight between a company and an enforcement agency; the other is that of a disinterested observer. This other position tells me that if we disregard for a moment that Telegram is a tech company championing privacy (and therefore a protagonist in most retellings of the story) and the Russian government is an embodiment of thuggishness (and therefore a likely villain of the piece) and just look at the situation as if it occurred elsewhere, we will see that Telegram might also have its share of blame in this story. It's as if a policeman ordered a suspect to freeze, but the suspect ran, and the policeman opened fire and wounded a bystander - well, it sure was the policeman who shot the gun, but is the fleeing suspect completely innocent of the situation? Would it be called victim blaming to suggest that he shares the blame for what happened? Can one be censured for saying that it would have been better if the suspect meekly obeyed the policeman?
- codedokode 8y ago
  You are misleading people not familiar with Russian legislation. There is no law saying you can ban random IP addresses.
  - azangru 8y ago
    I am not familiar with the Russian legislation myself, to be honest. Are you saying that Roskomnadzor, the Russian governmental agency, actively broke the Russian law? Have there been any articles or legal discussions about it you could reference? Has anyone threatened to sue (I know it’s pointless in Russia, but still)?
    - codedokode 8y ago
      Can you read Russian? Then here is the link: [1] A Russian company filed an action against Roskommnadzor demanding to compensate a loss of 5,000,000 RUB (~$75 000). The court dismissed it though. Here is another example: [2] [1] https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/news/2018/08/27/n_11956687.shtml https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/news/2018/08/27/n_11956687.shtml [2] https://www.rbc.ru/society/06/08/2018/5b6848b39a794769383b9ef0 https://www.rbc.ru/society/06/08/2018/5b6848b39a794769383b9e...
    - codedokode 8y ago
      There is one more thing. When RosKomNadzor blocks an IP address, it states the reason for doing that. If you look at IP addresses of Telegram proxies, for example here [1] you'll see that the reason for blocking is not a court decision (which ordered to block Telegram). The stated reason is an order from Prosecutor's Office. But when the Russian company filed an action against RKN, the Prosecutor's Office representative said that they didin't order to block unrelated IP addresses; it was RKN's own decision [2] [3]. And this is not according to the law. Doing everything according to the law would be too slow. [1] https://reestr.rublacklist.net/rec/518267/ https://reestr.rublacklist.net/rec/518267/ [2] https://roskomsvoboda.org/40800/ https://roskomsvoboda.org/40800/ [3] https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/2018/08/06/11885923/i_snova_pro_telegram.shtml https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/2018/08/06/11885923/i_snova_pro_t...
    - azangru 8y ago
      @codedokode Can't reply to your post with the links. They are interesting, and I am very curious about further developments — whether there will be more suits against Roskomnadzor for indiscriminate IP blocking. I found a site with the documents about the particular case that you referenced (articles in the news media are so superficial). There aren‘t yet materials available about the defendants’ legal position or about the justification of the judge’s decision, but I hope they will be uploaded soon enough: https://kad.arbitr.ru/Card/f268f6cc-0fa2-4d48-b325-5ae3b7a4d660 https://kad.arbitr.ru/Card/f268f6cc-0fa2-4d48-b325-5ae3b7a4d...
- frostburg 8y ago
  One should be criticized, because it's propaganda for being a coward. I'm going there and saying that this is exactly the logic that nazi apologists use to blame SS reprisals against civilians on resistance fighters.
  - azangru 8y ago
    > I'm going there and saying that this is exactly the logic that nazi apologists use to blame SS reprisals against civilians on resistance fighters. Sigh. You could have pointed at collective punishments that were practiced in schools (some students misbehave, the whole class is punished), or in the military (the whole platoon is punished for the actions of an individual), but no, you would rather invoke the Godwin’s law and drag the Nazis into discussion. In any case, it’s not even a fair analogy with my example. My example was about collateral damage happening as a result of baiting the authorities; yours is about deliberate hostage-taking. As for "propaganda for being a coward", well, to each their own. Call Joseph Heller ("Catch-22") or Terry Pratchett (novels featuring Rincewind) propagandists of cowardice then. (And it is not even a story about heroism or cowardice. Telegram is not being a hero here; it's not as if it is risking anything by defying the Russian government — it is well outside of reach of the Russian law enforcers.)
    - frostburg 8y ago
      Ignoring the fact that you're talking about a government that uses nerve agents on targets in foreign countries, the distinction you're making is spurious (if the collateral damage is predictable even for the other party, it's hostage-taking, if it's not predictable obviously it cannot be taken into account) and even if we doubt the motives of the Telegram people calling not submitting to censure and spying "baiting" as if the issue was morally neutral is dishonest.
      - azangru 8y ago
        How did we get here? :-) From the discussion of whether it's preferable to move away from a country that is demanding of you what you are not willing to give, or to ignore the official orders and bet on the country’s inability to enforce their ban — to Nazis — and then to “a government that uses nerve agents on targets in foreign countries” (at least you could have said "radioactive substances", referring to the case for which the inquiry has been held and for which the factual basis is pretty well known, instead of the case about which very little information has been shared with the public), within just a couple of posts? By leaving the Russian market Telegram wouldn’t have submitted to censorship and spying. They wouldn't have collaborated with the Russian special services. They would have kept their integrity. Much as what LinkedIn did when the Russians demanded they keep the information about the Russian citizens on the Russian soil and LinkedIn refused. It could all have been peaceful and quiet and dignified. And the problem of privacy vs censorship and spying is by no means limited to Russia. It will resurface in the progressive world. It will be interesting to see what the reaction will be then.

I am alternating between two perspectives: one is that of an internet user who was caught in a fight between a company and an enforcement agency; the other is that of a disinterested observer. This other position tells me that if we disregard for a moment that Telegram is a tech company championing privacy (and therefore a protagonist in most retellings of the story) and the Russian government is an embodiment of thuggishness (and therefore a likely villain of the piece) and just look at the situation as if it occurred elsewhere, we will see that Telegram might also have its share of blame in this story. It's as if a policeman ordered a suspect to freeze, but the suspect ran, and the policeman opened fire and wounded a bystander - well, it sure was the policeman who shot the gun, but is the fleeing suspect completely innocent of the situation? Would it be called victim blaming to suggest that he shares the blame for what happened? Can one be censured for saying that it would have been better if the suspect meekly obeyed the policeman?

codedokode 8y ago
You are misleading people not familiar with Russian legislation. There is no law saying you can ban random IP addresses.
- azangru 8y ago
  I am not familiar with the Russian legislation myself, to be honest. Are you saying that Roskomnadzor, the Russian governmental agency, actively broke the Russian law? Have there been any articles or legal discussions about it you could reference? Has anyone threatened to sue (I know it’s pointless in Russia, but still)?
  - codedokode 8y ago
    Can you read Russian? Then here is the link: [1] A Russian company filed an action against Roskommnadzor demanding to compensate a loss of 5,000,000 RUB (~$75 000). The court dismissed it though. Here is another example: [2] [1] https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/news/2018/08/27/n_11956687.shtml https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/news/2018/08/27/n_11956687.shtml [2] https://www.rbc.ru/society/06/08/2018/5b6848b39a794769383b9ef0 https://www.rbc.ru/society/06/08/2018/5b6848b39a794769383b9e...
  - codedokode 8y ago
    There is one more thing. When RosKomNadzor blocks an IP address, it states the reason for doing that. If you look at IP addresses of Telegram proxies, for example here [1] you'll see that the reason for blocking is not a court decision (which ordered to block Telegram). The stated reason is an order from Prosecutor's Office. But when the Russian company filed an action against RKN, the Prosecutor's Office representative said that they didin't order to block unrelated IP addresses; it was RKN's own decision [2] [3]. And this is not according to the law. Doing everything according to the law would be too slow. [1] https://reestr.rublacklist.net/rec/518267/ https://reestr.rublacklist.net/rec/518267/ [2] https://roskomsvoboda.org/40800/ https://roskomsvoboda.org/40800/ [3] https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/2018/08/06/11885923/i_snova_pro_telegram.shtml https://www.gazeta.ru/tech/2018/08/06/11885923/i_snova_pro_t...
  - azangru 8y ago
    @codedokode Can't reply to your post with the links. They are interesting, and I am very curious about further developments — whether there will be more suits against Roskomnadzor for indiscriminate IP blocking. I found a site with the documents about the particular case that you referenced (articles in the news media are so superficial). There aren‘t yet materials available about the defendants’ legal position or about the justification of the judge’s decision, but I hope they will be uploaded soon enough: https://kad.arbitr.ru/Card/f268f6cc-0fa2-4d48-b325-5ae3b7a4d660 https://kad.arbitr.ru/Card/f268f6cc-0fa2-4d48-b325-5ae3b7a4d...
frostburg 8y ago
One should be criticized, because it's propaganda for being a coward. I'm going there and saying that this is exactly the logic that nazi apologists use to blame SS reprisals against civilians on resistance fighters.
- azangru 8y ago
  > I'm going there and saying that this is exactly the logic that nazi apologists use to blame SS reprisals against civilians on resistance fighters. Sigh. You could have pointed at collective punishments that were practiced in schools (some students misbehave, the whole class is punished), or in the military (the whole platoon is punished for the actions of an individual), but no, you would rather invoke the Godwin’s law and drag the Nazis into discussion. In any case, it’s not even a fair analogy with my example. My example was about collateral damage happening as a result of baiting the authorities; yours is about deliberate hostage-taking. As for "propaganda for being a coward", well, to each their own. Call Joseph Heller ("Catch-22") or Terry Pratchett (novels featuring Rincewind) propagandists of cowardice then. (And it is not even a story about heroism or cowardice. Telegram is not being a hero here; it's not as if it is risking anything by defying the Russian government — it is well outside of reach of the Russian law enforcers.)
  - frostburg 8y ago
    Ignoring the fact that you're talking about a government that uses nerve agents on targets in foreign countries, the distinction you're making is spurious (if the collateral damage is predictable even for the other party, it's hostage-taking, if it's not predictable obviously it cannot be taken into account) and even if we doubt the motives of the Telegram people calling not submitting to censure and spying "baiting" as if the issue was morally neutral is dishonest.
    - azangru 8y ago
      How did we get here? :-) From the discussion of whether it's preferable to move away from a country that is demanding of you what you are not willing to give, or to ignore the official orders and bet on the country’s inability to enforce their ban — to Nazis — and then to “a government that uses nerve agents on targets in foreign countries” (at least you could have said "radioactive substances", referring to the case for which the inquiry has been held and for which the factual basis is pretty well known, instead of the case about which very little information has been shared with the public), within just a couple of posts? By leaving the Russian market Telegram wouldn’t have submitted to censorship and spying. They wouldn't have collaborated with the Russian special services. They would have kept their integrity. Much as what LinkedIn did when the Russians demanded they keep the information about the Russian citizens on the Russian soil and LinkedIn refused. It could all have been peaceful and quiet and dignified. And the problem of privacy vs censorship and spying is by no means limited to Russia. It will resurface in the progressive world. It will be interesting to see what the reaction will be then.