3 ms·

Brazilian here. I sincerely hope so, it is so tiresome to wade through all the bullshit discourse about it. For instance, the fake outrage about "persecution o

Brazilian here. I sincerely hope so, it is so tiresome to wade through all the bullshit discourse about it. For instance, the fake outrage about "persecution of christians" (when the opposite is far, _far_ more prevalent). Google (and likeminded billionaire businesses who can do no wrong, because you see, they're so goddamn rich) tried to pull a fast one and lobby though an "independent" organization, painting it as a "gag law", when its more like a "not ok to tell people to drink bleach" law. Disclaimer: not a republican (or equivalent), so I can actually change my mind and/or eat my words when confronted with better evidence.

lobocinza 3y ago
Also Brazilian. It's a gag law + forced funding of abject old media conglomerates. As a result of political alienation, poor education and a lack critical thinking there are bubbles that are feed with misinformation and believe in the most comical stories. But this legislation is wrong and will cause more damage than good. The descentralized free flow of information is a great thing and the Internet is truly neutral and better at identifying and driving out bad actors than the old media dinosaurs.
matheusmoreira 3y ago
> it is so tiresome to wade through all the bullshit discourse about it > its more like a "not ok to tell people to drink bleach" law Gotta agree with you, it's extremely tiresome to wade through complete bullshit like what you just wrote. They propose a law that essentially gives judges and politicians unilateral power to censor anything they consider fake and you come here to "inform" us that it's actually about nonsense like "it's not free speech to yell fire in a movie theather" -- who's really bullshitting? It's not like it matters anyway. Supreme court judges will continue legislating with their "judicial activism" whether this law passes or not. This is just a formality, an attempt to legitimize the unconstitutional acts these judges are already doing. They were more than happy to censor everything they didn't like during the elections despite the fact it was literally unconstitutional to do so -- what does a little law like this one mean to people who get away with that? Nothing. As long as police is enforcing their orders, whatever they write on their official documents is law.
- matheusmoreira 3y ago
  Yup, exactly as I predicted. They didn't manage to vote this crap into law and reacted by essentially declaring that the government and supreme court are going to regulate social media anyway.

lobocinza 3y ago

Also Brazilian. It's a gag law + forced funding of abject old media conglomerates. As a result of political alienation, poor education and a lack critical thinking there are bubbles that are feed with misinformation and believe in the most comical stories. But this legislation is wrong and will cause more damage than good. The descentralized free flow of information is a great thing and the Internet is truly neutral and better at identifying and driving out bad actors than the old media dinosaurs.

matheusmoreira 3y ago

> it is so tiresome to wade through all the bullshit discourse about it > its more like a "not ok to tell people to drink bleach" law Gotta agree with you, it's extremely tiresome to wade through complete bullshit like what you just wrote. They propose a law that essentially gives judges and politicians unilateral power to censor anything they consider fake and you come here to "inform" us that it's actually about nonsense like "it's not free speech to yell fire in a movie theather" -- who's really bullshitting? It's not like it matters anyway. Supreme court judges will continue legislating with their "judicial activism" whether this law passes or not. This is just a formality, an attempt to legitimize the unconstitutional acts these judges are already doing. They were more than happy to censor everything they didn't like during the elections despite the fact it was literally unconstitutional to do so -- what does a little law like this one mean to people who get away with that? Nothing. As long as police is enforcing their orders, whatever they write on their official documents is law.

matheusmoreira 3y ago
Yup, exactly as I predicted. They didn't manage to vote this crap into law and reacted by essentially declaring that the government and supreme court are going to regulate social media anyway.