Paradox of Tolerance
Yes that’s exactly what I was referring to.
They should be tolerant of people that don’t agree with them, and vice versa. But that shouldn’t IMO mean we have to like it or be banned from a discussion just because of a difference of opinion… but I have been seeing a hair trigger on anyone even remotely disagreeing on this.
they’re called crimeflare for a reason. besides being a government goldmine having access to everyone’s encrypted TLS traffic, they selectively enforce censorship in unethical ways.
why block kiwifarms when you still allow hosting monkey torture sites? or sites for sourcing bathtub HRT secretly sent to minors? they shouldn’t be policing the internet in the first place. this is dangerously close to invalidating Section 230 protections as well.
there’s so many more reasons it’s not even funny.
can not know
Yes they can, the articles are named with the filename of the content that’s in it, and the data itself is unencrypted. But I wasn’t even talking about blocking uploads, just having content providers be able to take down existing content.
But get this, it’s even worse in Switzerland because the provider is also now forced to keep that same content from reappearing! This is called the “stay down” rule.
country where only uploading is forbidden
downloading computer games and software remains a crime
Reminder that sites like israel.tv are still “illegal” to visit and all US ISPs are forced to block it, even though this directly contradicts Net Neutrality.