←back to thread

Brazil's X ban is sending lots of people to Bluesky

(www.theverge.com)
420 points rvz | 4 comments | 31 Aug 24 13:28 UTC | HN request time: 0.828s | source
Show context
nickpsecurity ◴[31 Aug 24 14:35 UTC] No.41409175[source]▶
One of the linked articles said it boiled down to X being ordered to censor political opponents of those in power. They chose not to. I’m glad.

Now, traffic is going to Bluesky. I wonder if this means that Bluesky has or will be offered the same choice. We might see what the character of that organization is by what choice they make.

replies(5): >>41409222 #>>41409280 #>>41410649 #>>41414032 #>>41418351 #
1. bsnsxd ◴[31 Aug 24 18:10 UTC] No.41410649[source]▶
"censor political opponents" is the most intellectually dishonest take, and in it lies the whole root of the discussion. Said opponents' accounts were asked to be shut down, not because they are opponents, but because they were being used to commit crimes against the electoral justice. The Supreme Court is a lifetime seat meant to not be caught in bi-yearly electoral politics, so it can oversee it, this current judge was the appointed by draw the judge of the whole "fake news inquiry", like every thing at the supreme court, he was also the elected president of the Supreme Court at the time of the previous elections (he was elected president by his colleagues in the supreme court). If the president at the time, or the drawn judge, was to be pro-coup, then we wouldn't have this whole debacle and elon musk would probably be CEO of Brazil at this moment. Since elon musk became owner of Twitter, brazillian court has struggled significantly more to obtain data from criminal accounts (a famous example being hate speech accounts that were not shut down, nor "doxxed" to the court, since according to twitter the hate speech didn't break TOS), to a point where it became impossible, so the court had to act, this situation has been boiling for a few years with Elon trying to strongarm his will in the country, he raised the bets, STF's called his bluff.
replies(2): >>41413482 #>>41413666 #
2. gruez ◴[01 Sep 24 01:31 UTC] No.41413482[source]▶
>Said opponents' accounts were asked to be shut down, not because they are opponents, but because they were being used to commit crimes against the electoral justice.

What are the "crimes" they're being accused of? Getting the opposition locked for "crimes" is basically authoritarianism 101. See: Venezuela[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_Venezuelan_presidential_e...

replies(1): >>41414452 #
3. mensetmanusman ◴[01 Sep 24 02:15 UTC] No.41413666[source]▶
It’s a crime to dishonor corrupt judges though… so it’s morally okay to not follow that law.
4. matheusmoreira ◴[01 Sep 24 05:07 UTC] No.41414452[source]▶
Crimes like calling the current president a condemned criminal. Which he once was. I watched them arrest him, and I watched multiple judges condemn him. Then these judges erased his crimes due to some technicality and made him innocent again, and we're all supposed to just magically unring the bells and wash our memories of these facts, or be censored.

Crimes like calling the current president a friend of dictators. Which he is. This guy rolled out the red carpet for the Venezuelan dictator months after he was elected. He also defended his recent "reelection".

Crimes like calling the current president a communist/socialist. Which he is. He literally calls himself one. I even have videos.

It's all "fake news" according to the judges.