• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    94 months ago
    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?
    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      There are standards whereby you can determine something is harmful and not covered by free speech. Like calling for violence against a demographic minority. That’s not either censorship or in bad faith, but upholding standards for a civilized society.
      It’s basically no different than the fact that you are not allowed to kill people in the street.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      164 months ago

      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?

      First: same club as EUA right? EUA banned TikTok so yeah everyone is in the same boat right now.
      Second: The move with Starlink was: Musk has a debt with Brazil, he didn’t paid the fines so the judges decide that they’ll freeze the money from Starlink because they understand that both companies are on the same corporate group

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      124 months ago

      Its a shutdown for non-compliance with a law.

      The law in non-compliance is an attempt to shut down misinformation related to an election where x refused to appoint a court representative. Rather than fight the battle in court they chose to just shut down brazil changing x from a brazil represented company to basically a purely foreign company similar to RT in the US.

      Like there’s a difference between showing up to court to fight for free speech and shutting down your offices so you can’t argue your case.

      • merde alors
        link
        fedilink
        English
        24 months ago

        when people volunteer their confessions, it probably makes jailing, torturing or execution easier. Xitter is a helpful service for the mullahs

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      24 months ago

      suppression of anything the government defines as dangerous

      That’s kind of one of the points of having a government… When it’s applied to banning toxic chemicals or violence, that’s the same thing happening but you just wouldn’t call it censorship.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14 months ago

      When I first learned about it, it kind of seems like school bullying or something criminal. “Give me 50000 if you want to keep operating”. It’s kind of funny, but it is also kind of sad. Anyway, the decision has it geopolitical importance.