7 ms·

I don't think the current regime has changed their policy out of the goodness of their hearts, or for the concerns of the citizenry. If I were to hazard a guess

I don't think the current regime has changed their policy out of the goodness of their hearts, or for the concerns of the citizenry. If I were to hazard a guess, I'm guessing it is so their army of digital burglars can wreak havoc on US sites, in retaliation for the bombings by the US. So I guess we can only expect more ransomware and more digital mayhem.

gpm 4mo ago
The internet is a pretty critical economic tool. I'd imagine that a good portion of the reason is simply to let Iranian businesses function.
whyage 4mo ago
You might be right; most of the traffic is bot-driven
lysace 4mo ago
The more important aspect is that the regime now feels certain enough that they have killed enough of the internal opposition so that the security forces can handle rest even with open comms.
tptacek 4mo ago
Iranian-sponsored threat actors have had network access throughout this entire conflict.
- lysace 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - platinumrad 4mo ago
    Insofar as it being regular citizens expression their opinions, yes, even if we might not agree with them. I wouldn't call that "pro-hamas propaganda".
    - deleted 4mo ago
      [deleted]
    - lysace 4mo ago
      What would you call it?
      - platinumrad 4mo ago
        The same thing you would call people on this site expressing geopolitical opinions that half of the world might disagree with.
  - t-3 4mo ago
    If you think propaganda is why people are upset about Gaza, you don't understand the politics and history. Diasporas produce grassroots domestic interest and activism, no propaganda needed. 70 years of forcing people out of their homes makes for a pretty significant diasporic population.
- 866-RON-0-FEZ 4mo ago
  Thanks for reminding everyone of the obvious. You'd think it wouldn't be necessary. The popular theory that all Iranian internet was shut off like Johnny pulling the plug out of the socket in Airplane is simplistic and beyond ludicrous.
  - AznHisoka 4mo ago
    That fact wasnt obvious to me.
Laurel1234 4mo ago
Wouldn't regime glow in the darks have open access already? You'd imagine they'd run a whitelist or something.
platinumrad 4mo ago
I'm not a fan of the Iranian government at all but this is pure Iran Derangement Syndrome. If you thought about this for half a second you'd realize that their "army of digital burglars" has had internet access the entire time. No state, and especially not one that specializes in proxy warfare, is going to intentionally cripple its actors with the highest damage to plausible deniability ratio.
- dakolli 4mo ago
  [flagged]
  - platinumrad 4mo ago
    It's the middle of the night in the region, so I don't expect very many human internet users from Israel or Iran right now. This may also explain why so much of the traffic coming out of Iran is flagged as bot traffic. I agree that a significant portion of urban middle class Iranians have been online the entire time, but it's a group that is roughly analogous to the people in China who go out of their way to use a VPN.
    - taneq 4mo ago
      What kind of crazy person would be on the internet on the middle of the night? None of us normal people would ever do that! cough cough
dakolli 4mo ago
[flagged]
- bluegatty 4mo ago
  "Don't fall for the trap where the US and Israel paints Iran as some authoritarian censor. The US is far more authoritarian" This is total delusion, honestly, it's why people in these systems will remain trapped for a long time. America has many problems but when people in places like Iran start on this bandwagon, it's evidence of inability to just weigh reality in the face of emotional rhetoric. Nobody is suggesting that Iran is 'committing genocide' - that's just something you made up, however, they have been killing protesters, this is very real. From Amnesty [1] (not exactly a pro US voice) Human Rights Watch [2] Amnesty and HRW indicate the state murdered at least thousands of protesters, and HRW has considerably more than that under investigation, there is plenty of evidence. There are 2000 drones that hit UAE and you hardly see a video, why? Because UAE officials are brutally oppressive about this. They threaten people with imprisonment and expulsion for any 'leaks' and they've been forcing social media personalities to push propaganda. That's just UAE, Iran is even more assertive. Press freedom index [3] Iran has a ruthlessly oppressive regime, not even comparable to that of the US. [1] https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east/iran/report-iran/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-af... [2] https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/iran https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/iran [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index
  - t-3 4mo ago
    > Iran has a ruthlessly oppressive regime, not even comparable to that of the US. Not comparable in domestic affairs... in foreign affairs the situation is reversed. US is by far the most violent, untrustworthy, and oppressive in the world, while Iran looks pretty peaceful and harmless in comparison.
    - bluegatty 4mo ago
      No, this is hyperbole. Even with the terrible shenanigans of the last 1.5 years - the US is actually still the only thing that holds the world together. The reason it's hard to grasp is because we see 'horrible Trump regime' - and previous failures in Iraq but don't look at the underlying tectonic security foundation. DJT is Humpty Dumpty on a very entrenched wall. We live in a 'Post World War 2' system of relative peace which hasn't really happened in history. The US could have occupied and controlled 1/2 the world after World War 2 - it choose not to. This is the one of the most meaningful geopolitical actS in history - that framework actually still exists. Here are some Eisenhower quotes that capture the ideology [1], worth a read ('no nation before another' etc.). That's still the foundation. We mostly accept the notion of sovereignty because of this order. Freedom of navigation for example - is something that we take for granted, but that only exists because of a Western-led order with the US as the base of that. Even Vietnam - it was acted upon for the same reasons as Korea, but it was a mess and the US failed, were they to have been successful, we would look at it differently. There is no way to be an 'entirely benevolent power in all affairs' - it's always going to be a bit murky. It is a paradox that DJT has threatened Greenland (which is really all about him, nobody actually supports that) but the actions in Venezuela are not totally inconsistent with 'order' - it just so happens to be done by a leader with ulterior motives. The US did not stay in Iraq or 'acquire' it's vast Oil reserves. Up until President Humpty Dumpty - the US provided security for the Gulf for 80 years - again, almost unthinkable in the context of history. People have completely forgotten that the 'true point of instability' in the Middle East is Egypt vs. Israel. That's way, way more dangerous than Iran v. Israel - but we don't talk about it because the US has been 'bribing' Egypt for decades - still to this day - with billions in aid and support to keep the political system reasonably balanced. Without that - there would be constant war between Israel and Egypt, and Suez would be closed. If the US did not exist as a 'power' - then the world would be wild place - Ukraine would have been conquered long ago, at very least the Baltic states as well. Neither the Suez or Panama canal would exist as we understand them, and it's hard to even grasp what the world map would look like. And all of that despite Iraq, Afghanistan etc.. The world is shifting away from this, but not completely. The US will lose 'absolute centrality' but will not loose general centrality. [1] https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/eisenhowers/quotes https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/eisenhowers/quotes

gpm 4mo ago

The internet is a pretty critical economic tool. I'd imagine that a good portion of the reason is simply to let Iranian businesses function.

whyage 4mo ago

You might be right; most of the traffic is bot-driven

lysace 4mo ago

The more important aspect is that the regime now feels certain enough that they have killed enough of the internal opposition so that the security forces can handle rest even with open comms.

tptacek 4mo ago

Iranian-sponsored threat actors have had network access throughout this entire conflict.

lysace 4mo ago
[flagged]
- platinumrad 4mo ago
  Insofar as it being regular citizens expression their opinions, yes, even if we might not agree with them. I wouldn't call that "pro-hamas propaganda".
  - deleted 4mo ago
    [deleted]
  - lysace 4mo ago
    What would you call it?
    - platinumrad 4mo ago
      The same thing you would call people on this site expressing geopolitical opinions that half of the world might disagree with.
- t-3 4mo ago
  If you think propaganda is why people are upset about Gaza, you don't understand the politics and history. Diasporas produce grassroots domestic interest and activism, no propaganda needed. 70 years of forcing people out of their homes makes for a pretty significant diasporic population.
866-RON-0-FEZ 4mo ago
Thanks for reminding everyone of the obvious. You'd think it wouldn't be necessary. The popular theory that all Iranian internet was shut off like Johnny pulling the plug out of the socket in Airplane is simplistic and beyond ludicrous.
- AznHisoka 4mo ago
  That fact wasnt obvious to me.

Laurel1234 4mo ago

Wouldn't regime glow in the darks have open access already? You'd imagine they'd run a whitelist or something.

platinumrad 4mo ago

I'm not a fan of the Iranian government at all but this is pure Iran Derangement Syndrome. If you thought about this for half a second you'd realize that their "army of digital burglars" has had internet access the entire time. No state, and especially not one that specializes in proxy warfare, is going to intentionally cripple its actors with the highest damage to plausible deniability ratio.

dakolli 4mo ago
[flagged]
- platinumrad 4mo ago
  It's the middle of the night in the region, so I don't expect very many human internet users from Israel or Iran right now. This may also explain why so much of the traffic coming out of Iran is flagged as bot traffic. I agree that a significant portion of urban middle class Iranians have been online the entire time, but it's a group that is roughly analogous to the people in China who go out of their way to use a VPN.
  - taneq 4mo ago
    What kind of crazy person would be on the internet on the middle of the night? None of us normal people would ever do that! cough cough

dakolli 4mo ago

[flagged]

bluegatty 4mo ago
"Don't fall for the trap where the US and Israel paints Iran as some authoritarian censor. The US is far more authoritarian" This is total delusion, honestly, it's why people in these systems will remain trapped for a long time. America has many problems but when people in places like Iran start on this bandwagon, it's evidence of inability to just weigh reality in the face of emotional rhetoric. Nobody is suggesting that Iran is 'committing genocide' - that's just something you made up, however, they have been killing protesters, this is very real. From Amnesty [1] (not exactly a pro US voice) Human Rights Watch [2] Amnesty and HRW indicate the state murdered at least thousands of protesters, and HRW has considerably more than that under investigation, there is plenty of evidence. There are 2000 drones that hit UAE and you hardly see a video, why? Because UAE officials are brutally oppressive about this. They threaten people with imprisonment and expulsion for any 'leaks' and they've been forcing social media personalities to push propaganda. That's just UAE, Iran is even more assertive. Press freedom index [3] Iran has a ruthlessly oppressive regime, not even comparable to that of the US. [1] https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east/iran/report-iran/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-af... [2] https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/iran https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2024/country-chapters/iran [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Freedom_Index
- t-3 4mo ago
  > Iran has a ruthlessly oppressive regime, not even comparable to that of the US. Not comparable in domestic affairs... in foreign affairs the situation is reversed. US is by far the most violent, untrustworthy, and oppressive in the world, while Iran looks pretty peaceful and harmless in comparison.
  - bluegatty 4mo ago
    No, this is hyperbole. Even with the terrible shenanigans of the last 1.5 years - the US is actually still the only thing that holds the world together. The reason it's hard to grasp is because we see 'horrible Trump regime' - and previous failures in Iraq but don't look at the underlying tectonic security foundation. DJT is Humpty Dumpty on a very entrenched wall. We live in a 'Post World War 2' system of relative peace which hasn't really happened in history. The US could have occupied and controlled 1/2 the world after World War 2 - it choose not to. This is the one of the most meaningful geopolitical actS in history - that framework actually still exists. Here are some Eisenhower quotes that capture the ideology [1], worth a read ('no nation before another' etc.). That's still the foundation. We mostly accept the notion of sovereignty because of this order. Freedom of navigation for example - is something that we take for granted, but that only exists because of a Western-led order with the US as the base of that. Even Vietnam - it was acted upon for the same reasons as Korea, but it was a mess and the US failed, were they to have been successful, we would look at it differently. There is no way to be an 'entirely benevolent power in all affairs' - it's always going to be a bit murky. It is a paradox that DJT has threatened Greenland (which is really all about him, nobody actually supports that) but the actions in Venezuela are not totally inconsistent with 'order' - it just so happens to be done by a leader with ulterior motives. The US did not stay in Iraq or 'acquire' it's vast Oil reserves. Up until President Humpty Dumpty - the US provided security for the Gulf for 80 years - again, almost unthinkable in the context of history. People have completely forgotten that the 'true point of instability' in the Middle East is Egypt vs. Israel. That's way, way more dangerous than Iran v. Israel - but we don't talk about it because the US has been 'bribing' Egypt for decades - still to this day - with billions in aid and support to keep the political system reasonably balanced. Without that - there would be constant war between Israel and Egypt, and Suez would be closed. If the US did not exist as a 'power' - then the world would be wild place - Ukraine would have been conquered long ago, at very least the Baltic states as well. Neither the Suez or Panama canal would exist as we understand them, and it's hard to even grasp what the world map would look like. And all of that despite Iraq, Afghanistan etc.. The world is shifting away from this, but not completely. The US will lose 'absolute centrality' but will not loose general centrality. [1] https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/eisenhowers/quotes https://www.eisenhowerlibrary.gov/eisenhowers/quotes