21 ms·
Russia to restrict Facebook access for 'censoring' its media
- nathanyz 5y agoThe infowars are going to be interesting to watch on this one
- birdyrooster 5y agolol did you just unironically use infowars or are you referencing Alex Jones
- nathanyz 5y agoWasn't meant as a reference to Alex Jones, but can see why it might seem that way after re-reading it ;)
- asplake 5y agoHonestly, I just wish Facebook, Twitter, Google, and even Microsoft and Apple just withdrew. The Russian government has only contempt for them anyway
- chrononaut 5y agoMicrosoft and Apple perhaps, but I suspect it's advantageous for Facebook, Twitter, and Google to remain otherwise the state propaganda apparatus would only get stronger.
- EEMac 5y ago
- marginalia_nu 5y agoAren't Russians mostly on VK and Yandex anyway?
- r721 5y agoStill Facebook is pretty popular, Statista says the penetration rate is 39%: https://www.statista.com/statistics/867549/top-active-social-media-platforms-in-russia/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/867549/top-active-social...
- graphpercolator 5y agoYea of a 140 million people they all agree with Putin. 0% disagree with Putin and even if they did 0% would use Reddit to communicate with people outside of Russia. Come on.
- marginalia_nu 5y agoWell my point is that if you shut down Russian access to western services, the Russians go to Russian services and only see what the Kremlin wants them to see. This doesn't harm Putin, it effectively helps him undo Glasnost. If the Russian people can't read CNN, they read Pravda.
- agumonkey 5y agoIt's not working great it seems. A few russian kids came on reddit expressing no hatred against ukraine, but being powerless due to the oligarchic structure of Russian politics. It might be a fake account I don't know. But with the recent risky protests.. actually I don't know what to say. It seems that propaganda is somehow deeper on non Russian groups. Lots of people in other countries are rooting for russia based on west past failures.
- tut-urut-utut 5y agoYou can't win the hearts of people only by propaganda. If someone comes from a country where NATO "introduced democracy" by bombing civilians and installing a puppet government, all Facebooks, Googles and Microsofts of the world will not help for those people to support USA over Russia, which didn't do anything wrong to them.
- Buttons840 5y agoIsolating the people will lead them to viewing us as an outside group, and people can easily be made to hate another group. Isolating the people will only make it worse.
- TameAntelope 5y agoMaybe I'm paranoid, but I assume 100% of Russian content on Reddit is manufactured. Their government has just invested so much into psyops that it successfully undermined legitimate engagement (for me).
- the_af 5y agoI don't follow that line of reasoning. If a few Russian kids express "no hatred against Ukraine" and claim to actually feel powerless at the oligarchic structure of their country (Russia), in which way do you feel this could be manufactured psyops? What purpose could this serve as propaganda, "Russians kids don't like Putin or the ruling system"? Wouldn't propaganda look more like "our country means Ukraine no harm, but in this case we are right because [reasons]"?
- hoffspot 5y ago
- odiroot 5y agoThere's always Telegram. People share channels with friends and family.
- hughrr 5y agoNo keep them up. There’s so much intelligence coming from them via social media.
- csee 5y agoAnd it's good to show Russians the true nature of what's happening. If you remove western social media then they just get the state narrative.
- twobitshifter 5y agoIt’s in the international interest to keep them up to spread propaganda and counter Russian propaganda. The withdrawal of media would make the fight very one sided in favor of Russia.
- usrusr 5y agoThat might be a fire Russia has to go through before it gets better. A powerful counterargument is that tough control seems to work out just fine in China, but I'm not sure Russia would really be "culturally compatible" with the Chinese way
- kobalsky 5y agocold war CIA wouldn't have dreamed of having a propaganda machine like social networks provide. it's a new war theater, they are not going away.
- hereforphone 5y agoSeveral if not all of these companies actively censor content based on their own ideas of what does and does not constitute acceptable expressions of acceptable ideology. A healthy amount of contempt for them is fine.
- Ambolia 5y agoThe internet just feels so small currently. The technology seems to be all here to make it distributed and open it up, but the convenience of centralization and the lack of network-effects of the distributed solutions seem to be the bottle-neck that stop them from gaining traction.
- erichocean 5y agoIf someone invented an algorithm to enable network effects on decentralized networks, they'd secure a place in computing history.
- throwaway_4ever 5y agoOpen protocols (HTTP and email) have even greater network effects than closed solutions (Facebook). However, you still need a strong push in the beginning, which protocols don’t usually have the funding while VC burns $100 million in an initial push.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- el_ravager 5y agoUnfortunately, it just doesn't seem to be the kind of problem that capitalism is able to solve.
- LightG 5y agoI remember a lovely time when my RSS was pulling in data from a huge and various number of independent sources, non-algorythmically, all compiled nicely in GReader ... without social media flame wars hanging off the end of every link. /random-cry-against-centralisation-of-the-internet
- Ambolia 5y agoNot necessarily against algorithmic feeds, but would be nice if you could chose your own algorithm, or just pure chronological feeds like you mentioned.
- agumonkey 5y agoIs this the first big nation military conflict in the era of ubiquitous video streaming ? It feels like this is de-staging the aggression, you see more details, you see more failures, it feels less impressive than past fights on TV for instance.
- givemeethekeys 5y agoAll the US conflicts in the past 10 years were in the era of ubiquitous video streaming.
- agumonkey 5y agoI'm sorry if I look stupid (too many crysis I guess) but I fail to remember what conflict started between the US and another nation in this decade.
- awb 5y agoThe US was involved in military operations on the ground in Iraq & Afghanistan and in the air in Libya & Syria in the 2010s. Not sure about boots on the ground vs. ISIS.
- d0mine 5y agoUS showed it can kill journalists (!) who are not aligned enough (remember wikileaks video). It might skew how wars are portrayed.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- MrYellowP 5y ago
- int_19h 5y agoThe difference here is that the conflict is happening in the part of the world where the majority of people have smartphones and Internet access, and belong to the culture where sharing "interesting things" online is routine.
- pyronik19 5y agoNo fan of Russia, but to pretend that facebook is some neutral platform that isn't trying to push their own political agenda is naive.
- nest0r 5y agoFor like 10 years in every thread about social media someone brings up their “own political agenda” but never specifies what they mean. If the main objective is maximizing profits there can’t be a strong political agenda because with every shift in governance the way to maximize profit will also shift. This whole political debate about social networks is just stupid they are cooperations first and if there is profit to be made they will take it no matter if it’s left or right.
- gdulli 5y ago> If the main objective is maximizing profits there can’t be a strong political agenda because with every shift in governance the way to maximize profit will also shift Even more simply, companies like Facebook and Twitter are stuck in the middle if for no other reason than they can't lose either half of their audience. They're happy if a few extremists peel off to their "free speech" platforms, because it's less headache for them and they don't have to worry about those platforms appealing to the mainstream. They themselves will obviously never do anything to lose the mainstream on either side.
- deutschewelle 5y agoNot sure why this comment is being downvoted, there is credible evidences that support this view, if not obvious from the US elctions
- lostmsu 5y agoBecause it is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- cmehdy 5y agoLimiting Facebook access also ensures that the Russians abroad who carry a voice against Putin in the language of their fellow citizens also get silenced/ignored. It's the bully closing his eyes to the damage he's doing, except that he's dragging 140 million people with him.
- mlkmt 5y agoanyone knows how Russia limited the access?
- abdullin 5y ago(lived in Russia until 2021, not authorative source of info) All ISP providers are required to have black boxes installed on-site. These boxes can do traffic shaping (e.g. Twitter is degraded) and basic filtering based on IP addresses. I think, deep packet inspection is also feasible. Config updates are pushed centrally to these boxes. Self-managed VPNs still work.
- baybal2 5y agoThese ISP blackboxes central command should be a prime target now.
- cutemonster 5y agoWhat about Tor? Or if Twitter gets more IP addresses, they'll work for a short while, until black box config updated?
- orthoxerox 5y agoTor is for nerds, they don't count. You can't expect regular people to run Tor on their phones.
- cutemonster 5y agoIf I ask if there's any place to buy rollerblades nearby, do you think that means I expect everyone to go by rollerblades?
- colinmhayes 5y agoTor provides degraded access without government intervention.
- keewee7 5y agoIn the 2000s and 2010s Russia lowered bandwidth on Western social media (and webmail) platforms to promote local alternatives. It worked and most Russians are not on Facebook, twitter and reddit. However Russia failed to suppress and replicate YouTube that is the only massively popular Western platform in Russia.
- konart 5y ago>However Russia failed to suppress and replicate YouTube that is the only massively popular Western platform in Russia. I'd say Instagram is as popular. Not sure about other services.
- vbezhenar 5y agoTik Tok is popular among young people.
- rossmohax 5y agoTikTok is not western though
- bonzini 5y agoIt is western in the sense that it is marketed to the west. Chinese people use Douyin instead.
- sudosysgen 5y agoTiktok is marketed to everywhere that isn't China. That's not the same as western.
- toomanydoubts 5y agoI'd say Pornhub is also pretty popular too. Don't ask me how I know it.
- 5y ago
- vbezhenar 5y agoUkraine banned vkontakte since 2017. Just to add some perspective. "This is different" I guess.
- TimTheTinker 5y agoWith Russia actively invading Ukraine at the moment, yeah it's different.
- throwaway894345 5y ago> "This is different" I guess. I should say so. Despite all of its hard-earned criticism, Facebook isn't the social media arm of a foreign invader.
- cutemonster 5y agoAnd Putin was using VK for psychological warfare. It was crazy it didn't get blocked sooner -- letting an aggressive threatening dictator have instant access to spreading targeted propaganda
- slezyr 5y agoIt just happens that VK was hijacked right before taking over Crimea. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VK_(service)#Durov's_dismissal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VK_(service)#Durov's_dismissal
- kahrl 5y agoIt's different because Russian sites contain ONLY propaganda, and dissent from the state is ALWAYS silenced. Take this this propaganda false equivalence nonsense and shove it.
- pessimizer 5y agoSaying vkontakte is ONLY propaganda is as dumb as saying Facebook is ONLY propaganda. They're social networks, and they also have your aunt's recipes and baby pictures.
- 5y ago
- rr808 5y agoTelegram is main social media platform of this war. Kinda weird to connect to Russian SM to find out what other side is saying (with Google translate). https://t.me/s/wargonzo https://t.me/s/wargonzo https://t.me/s/sashakots https://t.me/s/sashakots https://t.me/s/MedvedevVesti https://t.me/s/MedvedevVesti
- emteycz 5y agoWhat do you mean by connecting to Russian servers? Telegram has nothing to do with Russia.
- atlantas 5y agoWhat are they saying?
- rr808 5y agoRussians are the victims and are trying to get peace of course. Browsers will auto translate for you.
- bogdanu 5y agoJust saw some videos with that wargonzo neckbeard. Just disgusting, I wonder how he sleeps each night knowing how much shit he eats for a living.
- thinkingemote 5y agoA good tactic would be to point out to Russians that their government is censoring political things for them. They like to think they are free and above the hypocrisy of the west. But the key thing is the West allows it's citizens to criticise itself. The Russians do not have that freedom. It's basically becoming like China in the way of censorship and lack of freedom, to protect it's citizens and the fatherland. To sacrifice for the country. In the west we can say "my government is bad" and give examples of a number of terrible and true and shameful things. In Russia or China they cannot even admit truth. One tactic that we see from China and Russia is to criticise the chaotic nature of protests in the West and (again) to emphasise the hypocrisy on how the West deals with protests of the Left vs Right. The thing is that there IS a lot of truth here. But the key thing is that these protests occur nonetheless. In repressive regimes there is no freedom to protest. You cannot have hypocrisy in how you deal with political protests if you do not have political protests!
- throwawaygjdbsj 5y ago[flagged]
- dshpala 5y agoHeh, "point to Russians". I have several friends in Moscow, and up until the last few days they were in complete denial about Putin's intentions or troops buildup. There were memes, jokes, etc. The propaganda inside Russia is very strong. Russians need sanctions, they need to start suffering (economically or otherwise). And then maybe they'll wake up.
- skybrian 5y agoHow much have they changed their minds in the last few days?
- reaperducer 5y agoHow much have they changed their minds in the last few days? Enough that there are protests in most major Russian cities against the invasion of Ukraine. Just yesterday, Moscow police arrested over 1,000 protesters. They can only keep up that pace for so long.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- georgeglue1 5y agoTheoretically, the main point here is that Facebook has an independent fact checker program, and some of those fact checkers rated Russian media posts (which would lead to a big scary overlay and a reduction in views) I'd guess they would have used some other excuse to block Facebook sooner than later anyways though.
- MrYellowP 5y ago
- nvegater 5y agoHe didn’t said he believed that I think. They do have an independent fact checker. Wether that’s effective or makes sense is another question.
- georgeglue1 5y agoIndependent != Unbiased! Facebook, of course, can hire biased independent fact checkers. At least Facebook is not 100% determining truth of everything on their own.
- Andrew_nenakhov 5y ago"independent", are you really able to say it with straight face? I'm not even talking of russian posts, it is as partisan as can be, supporting Dem agenda and suppressing GOP.
- dr_hooo 5y agoNot a FB user, so I'm genuinely curious what the GOP agenda is being surpressed?
- CWuestefeld 5y agoIt's probably not perfectly accurate to frame this as DEM vs GOP agenda. It's closer to think of it in terms for Blue Tribe vs Red Tribe. And of course the Covid-19 stuff is the great example of this. 23 months ago you could get banned, or at least your posts blocked, for saying things that we now think are probably true. And this persists around some specific issues.
- rosmax_1337 5y agoMore countries should follow suit, I'm tired of seeing media censored by Facebook, not to mention Youtube and Twitter in Northern Europe too. Platforms should be just that, platforms, not outlets. Now I understand many of you will want to point out that "Russia is worse" and that it is somehow different. I don't care who is worse or if Russia does it for bad reasons, it is bad enough over here that it is also the correct choice for my nation and your nations.
- Andrew_nenakhov 5y agoRussian here. Most comments here are pure nonsense. The only reason Facebook risks getting blocked is because in Russia it is predominantly used by dissidents and people in opposition to Putin's regime. It doesn't block groups, events, etc at Kremlin's behest. So it should be blocked. Upd: many commenters here clearly misread my comment, or maybe it's my poor English. "It should be blocked" means that it is in Putin's interest to block it, but better under some pretext. I am personally in a very sharp opposition to Putin's criminal syndicate.
- kodablah 5y ago> it is predominantly used by dissidents and people in opposition to Putin's regime [...] So it should be blocked. Well, at least your stance is clear. Obviously most will disagree with a government blocking a site for being used by the current leader's opposition.
- tadfisher 5y agoI don't think you're reading the post charitably or correctly.
- kodablah 5y agoAh, I see...maybe the OP means FB should be blocked because they are not doing individual blocking at the government's request? I think it's still pretty easy to disagree with that justification too (same as I'd disagree if a US ISP was forced to block a Russian site that didn't kowtow to US requests). And it's still easy to see that the reasons given by the OP for why it risks getting blocked are disagreeable to.
- cutemonster 5y ago(I asked what was meant, in a sibling reply)
- cutemonster 5y agoIt sounds as if you think FB should block things at Kremlin's behest, and since FB doesn't, it deserves to get blocked itself -- is that what you meant? (Or did you mean that therefore it was logical for Putin to block FB? Or, well, maybe you wrote something different from what you wanted to write, not being a native English speaker)
- netXten 5y agoHi, Russian here, located in Moscow. I don’t root for our president and current operation in UA is not something I like. I had to say words above, sorry, and that words are true since I am mostly committed to western values. Facebook would be restricted in Russia because they don’t allow gov to publish their views, opinion and their “truth”, like any other gov can. There are also intentions to block youtube and any other platform, which have many russian users and which block different “zvezda”-like channels/accounts. I also think no any real user watches “zvezda”-channel on youtube or any other internet-platform. Additionally, I think that “if you own a house, you could no be required to allow anyone to live with you”
- netXten 5y agoAnd I forgot to ask a question. Why do you think that we all should feel pain of sanctions? Because we are not able to stand against gov? Well, we are not able. And I think noone would be able if there is such a law and permissions of authorities. And for sure we, who know English(ok, not as good like any EU-person knows) and not working in gov-structures are the most small part of russians who have different opinion
- eganist 5y ago> Why do you think that we all should feel pain of sanctions? Because we are not able to stand against gov? Well, we are not able. Every person can. That's why sanctions exist: to incentivize a government to focus on its people and isolate a violent government from the world, or conversely, for a people to hold their government accountable. What would you propose the world do instead of sanctions when diplomacy alone has clearly failed?
- coward-guy 5y agoIt's too late... Where were US and Europe with their sanctions when riots on Bolotnaya square happened? https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Bolotnaya_Square_case https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Bolotnaya_Square_case When Navalny was incarcerated? Do you think it is easy to stay against government with army? Look at Ukraine, there's the same Russian army there.
- NoOn3 5y agoInvasion is not a good decision. But Ukraine had some problems with radicals, with crimes and with respect to other languages in their country...
- NoOn3 5y agoWhy Russia just don't open independent sites for it's media. People who want to know different opinions will be able to come there themselves. It's strange that they necessarily want to be on facebook and youtube...
- Spivak 5y agoThe same reason people go on any platform — because you want to reach the audience that is specific to that platform. Sure you could put your video exclusively on Vimeo or host it yourself but then you miss out on the massive YouTube audience that won’t discover your content any other way. Same with Facebook.
- adriand 5y agoSocial media is such a problem in Western nations, has sapped our attention and divided us so immensely, that I honestly wish we would also regulate and crack down on it. Not because we don’t want people to learn about what’s happening in the world, but because what we see unfolding right now makes crystal clear the stakes of Western weakness and division. We have been fighting each other on Twitter and Facebook while the world goes to hell. Enough!
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago> I honestly wish we would also regulate and crack down on it It's mind boggling to read HN comments advocating for restricting people's free access to internet discourse. (Reminder that Hacker News is social media, too) Even a few years ago the idea of anyone in the tech world advocating for regulations or "crack downs" on letting people freely communicate on the internet would be unthinkable.
- adriand 5y agoI have no issue with free access to Internet discourse! In fact, I wish we had more free access to Internet discourse. What I object to is the commodification of attention, the deployment of sophisticated algorithms intended to drive clicks/views (and thus promote the most divisive and controversial viewpoints), pervasive surveillance, and so on. I don't think regulating these facets of our present-day technology, which are driven by profit motives, not by the desire of ordinary people to speak to one another, is at all incompatible with a free and open Internet.
- PragmaticPulp 5y ago> What I object to is the commodification of attention, What exactly would you regulate or "crack down" on? People are free to choose what websites they visit. This idea that evil social media companies have used technology to force people to view content they don't want to see has gotten out of hand. > the deployment of sophisticated algorithms Again, what exactly would you regulate away? Ban websites from showing related content? Ban Facebook from showing you things your friends are interested in? Ban Netflix from showing you shows you may like based on your previous viewings? Would you ban Hacker News' algorithm that determines which posts are shown on the front page? Just force everything to be un-algorithmic and chronologically ordered like the new page and hope for the best?
- throwawaymanbot 5y ago