104 points

Will it stop people from claiming it was a single judge being political and arbitrary? Certainly not.

permalink
report
reply
44 points

Doesn’t matter. The morons that follow musk already have a mindset of us vs them. All of Brazil is they whether one judge or a Supreme Court. Trump was found guilty by a jury co-selected by his own lawyers. But they were rigged against him. Even the lawyers probably. It doesn’t matter.

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

Even the lawyers probably

That’s what happens when you’re on your 15th-string team because you keep firing and/or not paying people.

permalink
report
parent
reply
79 points
*

I wonder why EU is dragging their feet for so long, when Xitter clearly doesn’t comply with regulation.
They’ve been giving warnings, but nothing else yet?
Also it kind of pisses me off, when public organisations and politicians that claim to defend democracy still use Xitter.
They are using and helping a platform that clearly has as a goal to undermine democracy.

permalink
report
reply
8 points

Because opposition parties generally have their groups in there, which would cause political backlash and distance the supporters that still use it. Not that banning social networks abusing their privilege through hidden moderation and promotion and selling their user’s data so propagandist know who and how to target shouldn’t be done, but right know it would be done under the counter-chants of “repression” in the particular cold war 2.0 state of affairs of the world today, and that’s very politically taxing.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Private companies, especially global ones, have too much power. Isn’t it kinda fucked up how a company can overrule laws in multiple countries all over the world, just due to how strong their presence is?

permalink
report
parent
reply
67 points

And nothing of value was lost.

permalink
report
reply
-145 points

How about the last scrap of pretense at democratic rule of law? Just because someone you do not like is on the receiving end, you should not applaud the authoritarian government.

permalink
report
parent
reply
111 points

The Supreme Court is upholding the rule of law. If Musk refuses to take action on the massive propaganda and disinformation campaigns that are rampant on his platform and lead to a fascist (like a literal fascist who praised the military dictatorship and openly said it’s only mistake was not to torture enough) getting elected, banning it shows that the democracy is still defensive and able to protect itself.

We can’t let tech monopolies just ignore any democratic rule and do whatever they want.

permalink
report
parent
reply
52 points

Care to expand on this?

Genuinely asking how Elon Musk unilaterally defying a unanimous court order is losing the “last scrap of pretense at democratic rule of law.” Seems like more of the same old oligarchy games like it always has been.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-20 points

I can see both sides on this one I think?

Out of curiosity, would you feel differently about this if it had been a print newsletter or physical book publisher that was printing Nazi propaganda that got shutdown because they refused to stop printing Nazi propaganda?

If so, what’s the substantive difference? If not, are you affirming banning people from publishing books based on ideological grounds?

Obviously banning books is bad, but obviously Nazis are bad, and that’s a hard square to circle.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-51 points
  1. It is a court order for censorship. You may not like what is said on that platform, but it is still straight up suppression of anything the government defines as dangerous. If you do not consider that a problematic move just because you agree with that government for now, you are in for a nasty surprise.
  2. If Brazil wants to shut down the service because of that: That is their right. Welcome to the same club as North Korea, China, and Iran. But what is that move with Starlink? When and where has it become acceptable to seize assets of a company because you have beef with one of its shareholders? What does this signal to other international activities in Brazil?
permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

It’s pretty simple: did Elon design a legal representative as asked by the judge?

He could have avoided this, but he thought he was above the law, and guess what? He’s not.

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

Man you right wingers are a very annoying bunch, always claiming censorship and loss of democracy while applauding the actual wannabe dictators doing gold medal deserving mental gymnastics to justify antidemocratic actions

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points

Yes, of course. The guy advocating against censorship and pro freedom of business must be a right winger. You do know, what the real right wingers will do, when they get these instruments into their hands? If not, you will probably find out soon in Brazil.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

america has her own supreme court problems to figure out before anyone starts weeping about brazil being mean to elon fucking musk

permalink
report
parent
reply
-40 points

Because some 300 million people somewhere have problems with their courts, the rest of the world does not matter?

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Nice bait

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

They are paraphrasing Thomas Paine:

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty, he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Wow, this is like, super stupid.

Wow

permalink
report
parent
reply
-15 points

Phew, I thought I was the only one here lol. This whole situation has me wondering what Brazil is trying to do that they’re so afraid will be talked about on X.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

if you still think that this is about free speech, you either didn’t read about what’s happening in Brazil or you can’t understand what you read

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points
*

Read starlink refuses to block it in Brazil, now I’m curious if that gets banned or somehow blocked although I can’t imagine how.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

The most they can really do is block payments, but even then, plenty of people would have access to foreign currency or bitcoin, so it wouldn’t be that effective. Elon’s also the kind of guy to start giving it away for free just to piss off Brazil’s government more.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

They can revoke Starlinks license to operate within the country; then issue arrest warrants for its operators.

The US has an extradition treaty with Brazil.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

They can shut down the ground stations in Brazil, but they can’t block the laser links. They could also try to jam the signals, but SpaceX now has years of experience working around jamming in a war zone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

That’s a lot of work for a shitposting site.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

“He added that individuals or businesses that are found to still be accessing X by using virtual private networks (VPNs) could be fined R$50,000 ($8,910; £6,780).”

Pretty sure that will include Starlink.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points

Instead of creating a law. The supreme court creates precedence. So in Democratic republics the judicial branch can do as they please? No. Their whole damn courts unhinged. Apparently the whole damn judicial branch is crooked. Why does the supreme court of Brazil have to get it’s nose involved in silencing citizens on PLATFORMS!?!?!?!? JUST ARREST THE CITIZENS!!! BUT APPARENTLY THEY WANT TO ATTACK CORPORTATIONS AND LEAVE THE PROBLEMATIC CITIZENS ALONE! Throw musk in a deep pit, but do it for a damn good reason like he doesn’t pay a living wage.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

The court is doing its job, X is not. Businesses should adhere to the country’s law. They can’t pick and choose what to obey or not obey and not expect to take the heat. Elon Musk’s decision to ignore the order was childish and only caused more harm to itself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Oh no, it’s not. As much as I hate Elon Musk, Alexandre de Moraes is a criminal. Some of the accounts he is trying to ban are specifically talking about some of his criminal activities. He unconstitutionally blocked Starlink some days ago because Elon Musk is part of the board. He ordered the blocking of ALL VPN services because he didn’t want people to access Twitter. That creates a TERRIBLE precedent, even if you agree that what he was doing in the first place was right. He already blocked Telegram and have been censoring everyone who says anything against him. As a Brazilian, it’s really conflicting to see all this going on. Elon Musk is an idiot and Moraes is a criminal.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 505K

    Comments