13 ms·

I'm from Nepal. The bans are implemented in a pretty straightforward way: ISPs simply don't resolve DNS queries for these services. switch your DNS, and you're

I'm from Nepal. The bans are implemented in a pretty straightforward way: ISPs simply don't resolve DNS queries for these services. switch your DNS, and you're good to go. There are 26 apps that were banned: Facebook, Facebook Messenger, Instagram, YouTube, WhatsApp, Twitter, LinkedIn, Snapchat, Reddit, Discord, Pinterest, Signal, Threads, WeChat, Quora, Tumblr, Clubhouse, Mastodon, MeWe, Rumble, VK, Line, IMO, Zalo, Soul, and Hamro Patro.

lighttower 1y ago
TikTok is still allowed? Isn't it the most damaging?
- bee_rider 1y ago
  I think it less like: governments see social media sites as damaging, so they ban them. It is more like: a lot of people see social media sites as damaging, so they don’t particularly care when their governments ban them for whatever arbitrary reasons the governments come up with. So, I’d expect the more that social media sites come back online to reflect their responsiveness to dealing with government demands, not the damaging-ness.
- lawlessone 1y ago
  >Isn't it the most damaging? Depends on who you ask. I'd consider it damaging but nowhere near as damaging as X in recent times. And would consider FB worse that both for sheer the hysteria it generates in the old.
- noselasd 1y ago
  TikTok complied with their regulation last year. The regulations basically requires social media platforms with > 1 million nepalese accounts to get a license to operate in Nepal. The bill and requirments doesn't seem unreasonable, atleast according to https://www.lawgandhi.com/social-media-bill-2081-2025/ https://www.lawgandhi.com/social-media-bill-2081-2025/
ivape 1y ago
What’s the justification? Only a state religion could provide the societal justification. I don’t know, I’m recently living under Trump, so a failed authoritarian state is very new to me. Can anyone explain how normalized and day-to-day news like this is over there? For example, we really don’t know what to do with news like this here, most of us just go on with our lives.
31337Logic 1y ago
[flagged]
- rancidcrab 1y ago
  Doesn't signal automatically proxy your traffic if it detects that the domain is blocked? I assume signal will just continue to work in Nepal despite their DNS block.
lawlessone 1y ago
BlueSky still good i guess.
deadbabe 1y ago
What if you just access the IP directly?
- nomel 1y ago
  A sparsly populated host file will get around it.
- ranguna 1y ago
  Then you'll lose https I believe
qwerty456127 1y ago
Blocking Signal or Reddit sounds bizarre for a civilized democratic country. What sense can that make other than denying people the right for privacy of personal communications or uncensored information access? I am very surprised Nepal goes this way.
- stainablesteel 1y ago
  maybe this is odd but i just have to ask, do you consider reddit usage to be the sign of a civilized democracy?
  - skirge 1y ago
    reddit makes no harm, thus there is no reason to block it.
    - skinnymuch 1y ago
      Reddit is a western American site while western hegemony exists. There’s always a reason for the global south to block western sites/companies
      - qwerty456127 1y ago
        Sure - the reason is the want more control over their people, they want to surveil them (hence blocking Signal), they want them to only read or express "correct" texts and prevent them from participating in open loosely-moderated discussions (hence blocking Reddit).
      - int_19h 1y ago
        Wouldn't want comrades to get cooties from reading icky things?
  - qwerty456127 1y ago
    I consider banning it uncharacteristic to such. I can hardly consider a state where people are not allowed to access Reddit (as well as HN, Wikipedia or StackExchange) freely and anonymously a healthy civilized democracy. It can still be a very civilized society in general but tightening control on the people like this indicates the government is going slippery slope.
electriclove 1y ago
Why?
nirava 1y ago
This is not true. "Switch your DNS" hasn't worked for while. It didn't work for the TikTok ban. The ISPs are not incompetent. If the DNS change solution ever works, because they are half-assing it for whatever reason. And this time they apparently aren't. And in any case, this is a really bad way to look at this situation. Your response to the government taking the next step in what looks like a very well planned power grab and move towards authoritarianism shouldn't be "well the ISPs suck here".
mynameismon 1y ago
Interesting that Mastodon was blocked. How exactly was that ban supposed to be enforced, by blocking every single instance in existence?
- dahsameer 1y ago
  I'm pretty sure they didn't do their research well. They probably think mastodon's app is the top result that comes up when mastodon is typed into google. They also decided to block MeWe which is weird because nobody I know has ever heard of it. Another interesting choice was Rumble. Twitch was left alone but Rumble was blocked
  - slim 1y ago
    > MeWe which is weird because nobody I know has ever heard of it. Another interesting choice was Rumble. Twitch was left alone but Rumble was blocked From experience, this is a symptom of them wanting to censor a specific piece of content which is on all those platforms. Look for it, you may discover something interesting. I live in Tunisia, which had one of the most censored internet in the world before 2011.
  - diggan 1y ago
    > decided to block MeWe which is weird because nobody I know has ever heard of it Seems to indicate they're not actually trying to prevent their citizens from doing anything in particular, they're just trying to get these international companies to follow their local laws since they operate there.
    - Aloisius 1y ago
      Does mastodon actually operate in Nepal?
      - danielheath 1y ago
        It's a big country; surely there's at least one instance running.
amelius 1y ago
> switch your DNS, and you're good to go Except you might get a visit from the FCC equivalent.
- dahsameer 1y ago
  as long as my ISP doesn't snitch on me, I'm fine. ISPs also have a stake in this ban because the last time a block was implemented (on TikTok), people flocked to VPNs, which drove up bandwidth costs for them. so, I think while ISPs in Nepal are technically complying with the law by blocking these services, they're doing it in a way that’s intentionally easy to bypass. Now that TikTok is unbanned, the news of DNS switching is spreading quickly in Nepal through it
  - diggan 1y ago
    > I think while ISPs in Nepal are technically complying with the law by blocking these services, they're doing it in a way that’s intentionally easy to bypass If you reframe the issue from "Nepal wants to punish the users" to "Nepal wants to punish the companies", implementing an easy DNS block makes a lot more sense. As long as most users are unable to access the platforms, the companies will get hurt by it, I think the idea is at least.
  - arresin 1y ago
    Does no one have the political power to ban tiktok? Even the American president couldn’t. It’s just too politically fraught because people get angry without their tiktok.
  - godshatter 1y ago
    Does using a VPN increase traffic for your ISP? I would think it's roughly the same amount of traffic, just encrypted from the ISPs perspective. Things take a longer route to get to your final destination and back, but it's not the traffic on the ISP that is increased. Unless encrypted data is much larger than unencrypted data.
    - DobarDabar 1y ago
jjice 1y ago
> switch your DNS, and you're good to go That would definitely allow you to access the sites again, but is it illegal to do that now, or is this kind of just a soft block without legal ramifications?
- spike021 1y ago
  wouldn't using a VPN be just as illegal then?
- diggan 1y ago
  > That would definitely allow you to access the sites again, but is it illegal to do that now, or is this kind of just a soft block without legal ramifications? The move seems to not be about blocking citizens access or trying to prevent communication at all, but rather to punish those specific companies because they weren't following the law, since there are companies who weren't blocked.
SapporoChris 1y ago
[flagged]
- zelphirkalt 1y ago
  I would agree, but one exception: Signal. How did Signal brush them the wrong way? Do they have a law against e2ee that is at odds fundamentally with how Signal works?
  - bee_rider 1y ago
    Signal seems like an unfortunate loser in this sort of situation. They are big enough to be noticed, but they don’t really have a “business model” that lends itself to complying with this sort of law. I mean, they are more like an altruistic non-profit than a conventional company, so betraying their mission to comply with this sort of law seems… unlikely, right? I think their source code is up on, like, GitHub or something. Blocking GitHub seems a bit too far for most countries. Who knows, maybe folks in Nepal will figure out a workaround using the source code.

lighttower 1y ago

TikTok is still allowed? Isn't it the most damaging?

bee_rider 1y ago
I think it less like: governments see social media sites as damaging, so they ban them. It is more like: a lot of people see social media sites as damaging, so they don’t particularly care when their governments ban them for whatever arbitrary reasons the governments come up with. So, I’d expect the more that social media sites come back online to reflect their responsiveness to dealing with government demands, not the damaging-ness.
lawlessone 1y ago
>Isn't it the most damaging? Depends on who you ask. I'd consider it damaging but nowhere near as damaging as X in recent times. And would consider FB worse that both for sheer the hysteria it generates in the old.
noselasd 1y ago
TikTok complied with their regulation last year. The regulations basically requires social media platforms with > 1 million nepalese accounts to get a license to operate in Nepal. The bill and requirments doesn't seem unreasonable, atleast according to https://www.lawgandhi.com/social-media-bill-2081-2025/ https://www.lawgandhi.com/social-media-bill-2081-2025/

ivape 1y ago

What’s the justification? Only a state religion could provide the societal justification. I don’t know, I’m recently living under Trump, so a failed authoritarian state is very new to me. Can anyone explain how normalized and day-to-day news like this is over there? For example, we really don’t know what to do with news like this here, most of us just go on with our lives.

31337Logic 1y ago

[flagged]

rancidcrab 1y ago
Doesn't signal automatically proxy your traffic if it detects that the domain is blocked? I assume signal will just continue to work in Nepal despite their DNS block.

lawlessone 1y ago

BlueSky still good i guess.

deadbabe 1y ago

What if you just access the IP directly?

nomel 1y ago
A sparsly populated host file will get around it.
ranguna 1y ago
Then you'll lose https I believe

qwerty456127 1y ago

Blocking Signal or Reddit sounds bizarre for a civilized democratic country. What sense can that make other than denying people the right for privacy of personal communications or uncensored information access? I am very surprised Nepal goes this way.

stainablesteel 1y ago
maybe this is odd but i just have to ask, do you consider reddit usage to be the sign of a civilized democracy?
- skirge 1y ago
  reddit makes no harm, thus there is no reason to block it.
  - skinnymuch 1y ago
    Reddit is a western American site while western hegemony exists. There’s always a reason for the global south to block western sites/companies
    - qwerty456127 1y ago
      Sure - the reason is the want more control over their people, they want to surveil them (hence blocking Signal), they want them to only read or express "correct" texts and prevent them from participating in open loosely-moderated discussions (hence blocking Reddit).
    - int_19h 1y ago
      Wouldn't want comrades to get cooties from reading icky things?
- qwerty456127 1y ago
  I consider banning it uncharacteristic to such. I can hardly consider a state where people are not allowed to access Reddit (as well as HN, Wikipedia or StackExchange) freely and anonymously a healthy civilized democracy. It can still be a very civilized society in general but tightening control on the people like this indicates the government is going slippery slope.

electriclove 1y ago

Why?

nirava 1y ago

This is not true. "Switch your DNS" hasn't worked for while. It didn't work for the TikTok ban. The ISPs are not incompetent. If the DNS change solution ever works, because they are half-assing it for whatever reason. And this time they apparently aren't. And in any case, this is a really bad way to look at this situation. Your response to the government taking the next step in what looks like a very well planned power grab and move towards authoritarianism shouldn't be "well the ISPs suck here".

mynameismon 1y ago

Interesting that Mastodon was blocked. How exactly was that ban supposed to be enforced, by blocking every single instance in existence?

dahsameer 1y ago
I'm pretty sure they didn't do their research well. They probably think mastodon's app is the top result that comes up when mastodon is typed into google. They also decided to block MeWe which is weird because nobody I know has ever heard of it. Another interesting choice was Rumble. Twitch was left alone but Rumble was blocked
- slim 1y ago
  > MeWe which is weird because nobody I know has ever heard of it. Another interesting choice was Rumble. Twitch was left alone but Rumble was blocked From experience, this is a symptom of them wanting to censor a specific piece of content which is on all those platforms. Look for it, you may discover something interesting. I live in Tunisia, which had one of the most censored internet in the world before 2011.
- diggan 1y ago
  > decided to block MeWe which is weird because nobody I know has ever heard of it Seems to indicate they're not actually trying to prevent their citizens from doing anything in particular, they're just trying to get these international companies to follow their local laws since they operate there.
  - Aloisius 1y ago
    Does mastodon actually operate in Nepal?
    - danielheath 1y ago
      It's a big country; surely there's at least one instance running.

amelius 1y ago

> switch your DNS, and you're good to go Except you might get a visit from the FCC equivalent.

dahsameer 1y ago
as long as my ISP doesn't snitch on me, I'm fine. ISPs also have a stake in this ban because the last time a block was implemented (on TikTok), people flocked to VPNs, which drove up bandwidth costs for them. so, I think while ISPs in Nepal are technically complying with the law by blocking these services, they're doing it in a way that’s intentionally easy to bypass. Now that TikTok is unbanned, the news of DNS switching is spreading quickly in Nepal through it
- diggan 1y ago
  > I think while ISPs in Nepal are technically complying with the law by blocking these services, they're doing it in a way that’s intentionally easy to bypass If you reframe the issue from "Nepal wants to punish the users" to "Nepal wants to punish the companies", implementing an easy DNS block makes a lot more sense. As long as most users are unable to access the platforms, the companies will get hurt by it, I think the idea is at least.
- arresin 1y ago
  Does no one have the political power to ban tiktok? Even the American president couldn’t. It’s just too politically fraught because people get angry without their tiktok.
- godshatter 1y ago
  Does using a VPN increase traffic for your ISP? I would think it's roughly the same amount of traffic, just encrypted from the ISPs perspective. Things take a longer route to get to your final destination and back, but it's not the traffic on the ISP that is increased. Unless encrypted data is much larger than unencrypted data.
  - DobarDabar 1y ago

jjice 1y ago

> switch your DNS, and you're good to go That would definitely allow you to access the sites again, but is it illegal to do that now, or is this kind of just a soft block without legal ramifications?

spike021 1y ago
wouldn't using a VPN be just as illegal then?
diggan 1y ago
> That would definitely allow you to access the sites again, but is it illegal to do that now, or is this kind of just a soft block without legal ramifications? The move seems to not be about blocking citizens access or trying to prevent communication at all, but rather to punish those specific companies because they weren't following the law, since there are companies who weren't blocked.

SapporoChris 1y ago

[flagged]

zelphirkalt 1y ago
I would agree, but one exception: Signal. How did Signal brush them the wrong way? Do they have a law against e2ee that is at odds fundamentally with how Signal works?
- bee_rider 1y ago
  Signal seems like an unfortunate loser in this sort of situation. They are big enough to be noticed, but they don’t really have a “business model” that lends itself to complying with this sort of law. I mean, they are more like an altruistic non-profit than a conventional company, so betraying their mission to comply with this sort of law seems… unlikely, right? I think their source code is up on, like, GitHub or something. Blocking GitHub seems a bit too far for most countries. Who knows, maybe folks in Nepal will figure out a workaround using the source code.