4 ms·

If I'm reading that correctly, the court is taking this action after requesting that rumble respond to their requests and rumble has not responded. It's not cen

If I'm reading that correctly, the court is taking this action after requesting that rumble respond to their requests and rumble has not responded. It's not censorship from the get-go, it's brinkmanship from rumble to get this response, it seems

huang_chung 2y ago
[flagged]
- simtel20 2y ago
  What makes you think I specifically would think differently about apple? I don't think I've said anything here that would indicate that, so it seems like you're projecting. The idea of a free Internet is an ideal that is subject to the sovereign laws of the country the packets travel to, and that is playing out here. All I know is that it's important to learn the lessons being taught now in the 2020s where control of the data transmitted to populations is how politics is won Regarding this answer being posted twice, I guess my edit to the response in the wrong thread wasn't accepted, not much anyone but the mods can do about that now.
  - huang_chung 2y ago
    Accepting censorship as a lost cause will be detrimental to society. Websites are subject to the laws in which they are based, not the packets' destination! Example: Germany requires Impressum displayed upon the website. It is requires only for sites based in Germany and not enforceable anywhere else!
    - lmz 2y ago
      Those are the old days. Today every website has that cookie banner because of EU laws.
      - encom 2y ago
        Thank god for ublock. Worth it, just to get rid of that nonsense. Whatever apparatchik came up with that, should be tried for crimes against humanity.
      - huang_chung 2y ago
        HN does not have cookie banner? Should they? Is HN subject to the laws of EU?
      - Two4 2y ago
        Cookie banners are not mandated by law, disclosure of and consent to tracking and capturing private user data and its sharing to third parties is. Cookie banners are just the easiest UX pattern to slap on to an existing website, and lends itself to dark patterns so users blindly click "accept all". There's multiple browser extensions that exist that will automatically opt you out and you never have to see those cookie banners again.
        lmz 2y ago
        The topic was the "worldwide reach" of the laws, not the cookies themselves.
    - simtel20 2y ago
      You have too black and white a view of this. It's not about accepting censorship, it's about refining the governing laws. Shouting "Fire" in the theater has always been a good line to draw, and a way to discuss what is healthy vs. not us important.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

huang_chung 2y ago

[flagged]

simtel20 2y ago
What makes you think I specifically would think differently about apple? I don't think I've said anything here that would indicate that, so it seems like you're projecting. The idea of a free Internet is an ideal that is subject to the sovereign laws of the country the packets travel to, and that is playing out here. All I know is that it's important to learn the lessons being taught now in the 2020s where control of the data transmitted to populations is how politics is won Regarding this answer being posted twice, I guess my edit to the response in the wrong thread wasn't accepted, not much anyone but the mods can do about that now.
- huang_chung 2y ago
  Accepting censorship as a lost cause will be detrimental to society. Websites are subject to the laws in which they are based, not the packets' destination! Example: Germany requires Impressum displayed upon the website. It is requires only for sites based in Germany and not enforceable anywhere else!
  - lmz 2y ago
    Those are the old days. Today every website has that cookie banner because of EU laws.
    - encom 2y ago
      Thank god for ublock. Worth it, just to get rid of that nonsense. Whatever apparatchik came up with that, should be tried for crimes against humanity.
    - huang_chung 2y ago
      HN does not have cookie banner? Should they? Is HN subject to the laws of EU?
    - Two4 2y ago
      Cookie banners are not mandated by law, disclosure of and consent to tracking and capturing private user data and its sharing to third parties is. Cookie banners are just the easiest UX pattern to slap on to an existing website, and lends itself to dark patterns so users blindly click "accept all". There's multiple browser extensions that exist that will automatically opt you out and you never have to see those cookie banners again.
      - lmz 2y ago
        The topic was the "worldwide reach" of the laws, not the cookies themselves.
  - simtel20 2y ago
    You have too black and white a view of this. It's not about accepting censorship, it's about refining the governing laws. Shouting "Fire" in the theater has always been a good line to draw, and a way to discuss what is healthy vs. not us important.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]