3 ms·
> Whereas if it could be installed from a website or from another store, there’s just no possible way that they could go around to every single host in existenc
by trashb 1y ago
> Whereas if it could be installed from a website or from another store, there’s just no possible way that they could go around to every single host in existence and try to shut it down.
That doesn't make sense to me, couldn't the Trump administration just as easily make ISP's block the required pages. Similar to how the Pirate Bay is blocked in many countries?
- iamnothere 1y agoThey could not easily do this, as there’s no mechanism for it. The “Block BEARD” bill currently in Congress is a first attempt to enact some kind of domestic site blocking in the US, but it’s focused on piracy and would need modifications. The closest thing we have is seizing domain names which has been done for various reasons, but this doesn’t work for foreign domains. They could just order it blocked extralegally, then attempt to exert extralegal pressure to force ISPs to implement the order, but this would likely face widespread pushback, a successful court challenge, and public embarrassment. So it’s not a serious risk until there is a law in place that could be twisted to enable this sort of blocking.
- actionfromafar 1y agoWhere we are going, we don't need laws. Executive Orders will be just fine.
- iamnothere 1y agoSee my edit—this is certainly possible but I don’t see this approach being successful (yet). They could also just drone strike the devs, and yet they do not. There is a reason for that, it’s not just that they haven’t thought of it as an option. It’s not a realistic option in the current political environment.
- aaomidi 1y agoIt’s called boiling the frog.
- actionfromafar 1y agoEven Putin took more than a decade before really clamping down on dissent.