4 ms·

According to Russia these guys are rioters and mobs and so cutting off internet is justified. It is reported in English news as 'protesters' getting their commu

According to Russia these guys are rioters and mobs and so cutting off internet is justified. It is reported in English news as 'protesters' getting their communication cut off. However, about two weeks ago the US president himself and any site or program where 'protesters' also known as 'rioters' or 'mobs' were able to communicate had their communication cut off, even with access to the internet. Besides websites, social media, video hosting sites, web hosting providers, ISPs, domain holders, payment processors, all of the above used censorship in the U.S. The effect of cutting off communication was the same and even these protests are essentially the same reason people in the U.S. were 'protesting.' So really it is how you define or even how a protest is depicted that determines whether people are for censorship resistant communication.

lovecg 6y ago
I’m not sure what you are referring to. As far as I know internet connectivity was never intentionally disrupted on Jan 6th, and of course people could and did communicate. We have a whole cache of videos that were livestreamed from that event.
- berryjerry 6y ago
  I'm talking about the intent behind cutting off communication was the same in both instances. The intent is to eliminate the ability for people to organize. You do that literally removing every post that includes a mention of election fraud. Notice how no articles in the U.S. mentioned the reason behind the U.S. capitol? They specifically wanted to hide the message of the 'protest' or 'riot.' Russia is using an axe to perform surgery since they don't have association or control of most of the U.S. companies which also are accessed in Russia. But the U.S. was able to use a scalpel and focus just on the part they wanted to cut.
  - lovecg 6y ago
    Did the US government remove those posts or ordered those articles to be written in a specific way? Not quite sure what you’re asserting. Not to mention that Jan 6th and the current situation in Russia have approximately 0 things in common.
    - larusso 6y ago
      I think he means the aftermath of the 6th and what happened to Parler and that Trump was blocked by Twitter etc. But I also think this doesn’t relate at all since Twitter, Google, Apple and Amazon acted on their own.
      - juanani 6y ago
        I believe Youtube was asked by a few US Senators to take down(censor) election fraud related videos. They did not act from policy.
        lovecg 6y ago
        Thank you, wasn’t aware of this before. But still, a strongly worded letter from the legislative is a far cry from immediate enforcement by the executive.
      - berryjerry 6y ago
        Right. However, the FBI actually has a very close relationship with all of the tech mega-cap companies. America scolds China for having their companies majority owned by the Chinese government but the effect of the pressure of the FBI is essentially the same. They get access to all information they want and if they don't they call and put pressure. These companies are often essentially forced to comply with FBI orders or requests to halt communication. If it was one company it wouldn't be a big deal but there is huge cooperation between all the mega-cap companies and whether the FBI actually orders it or not, them working together results in mass censorship on a scale that covers 99% of internet traffic.

lovecg 6y ago

I’m not sure what you are referring to. As far as I know internet connectivity was never intentionally disrupted on Jan 6th, and of course people could and did communicate. We have a whole cache of videos that were livestreamed from that event.

berryjerry 6y ago
I'm talking about the intent behind cutting off communication was the same in both instances. The intent is to eliminate the ability for people to organize. You do that literally removing every post that includes a mention of election fraud. Notice how no articles in the U.S. mentioned the reason behind the U.S. capitol? They specifically wanted to hide the message of the 'protest' or 'riot.' Russia is using an axe to perform surgery since they don't have association or control of most of the U.S. companies which also are accessed in Russia. But the U.S. was able to use a scalpel and focus just on the part they wanted to cut.
- lovecg 6y ago
  Did the US government remove those posts or ordered those articles to be written in a specific way? Not quite sure what you’re asserting. Not to mention that Jan 6th and the current situation in Russia have approximately 0 things in common.
  - larusso 6y ago
    I think he means the aftermath of the 6th and what happened to Parler and that Trump was blocked by Twitter etc. But I also think this doesn’t relate at all since Twitter, Google, Apple and Amazon acted on their own.
    - juanani 6y ago
      I believe Youtube was asked by a few US Senators to take down(censor) election fraud related videos. They did not act from policy.
      - lovecg 6y ago
        Thank you, wasn’t aware of this before. But still, a strongly worded letter from the legislative is a far cry from immediate enforcement by the executive.
    - berryjerry 6y ago
      Right. However, the FBI actually has a very close relationship with all of the tech mega-cap companies. America scolds China for having their companies majority owned by the Chinese government but the effect of the pressure of the FBI is essentially the same. They get access to all information they want and if they don't they call and put pressure. These companies are often essentially forced to comply with FBI orders or requests to halt communication. If it was one company it wouldn't be a big deal but there is huge cooperation between all the mega-cap companies and whether the FBI actually orders it or not, them working together results in mass censorship on a scale that covers 99% of internet traffic.