←back to thread

808 points shaunpud | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
mrtksn ◴[] No.45003438[source]
Traditionally in the west, censorship was through copyright rights. It wasn’t considered censorship if you do it for money and business.

Fast forward to today, Americans are pushing you for self censorship through force and denial(if you don’t speak in line with the admin, you will have hard time in your US public sector job or if you want to travel to US) and Europeans find all kind of other ways.

Tough new world order. I used to be advocating for resolution through legal/political means, but now I'm inclined to believe that the solution must be technological because everybody wants security and control. Nobody wants loose ends. Everyone is terrified of some group of people will do something to them, freedom is out of fashion and those claiming otherwise want freedom for themselves only. The guy who says want to make humans interplanetary species is posing with people detained for traveling on the planet without permission. Just forget about it.

So this website itself is about censorship, therefore people interested in this shouldn’t be using websites. New tools are needed, the mainstream will be controlled the way the local hegemony sees it fit.

replies(11): >>45003665 #>>45003694 #>>45003703 #>>45003707 #>>45003817 #>>45003837 #>>45003945 #>>45003970 #>>45003991 #>>45004290 #>>45008332 #
mtsr ◴[] No.45003707[source]
Interesting point. There’s wide acceptance of commercial censorship, but censorship for the common good (rightfully) feels like a slippery slope. But are they actually so different? Couldn’t the latter be done in a way just as purposeful? Or does it always lead to loss of freedom disproportional to its goals?
replies(6): >>45003735 #>>45003736 #>>45003749 #>>45003946 #>>45004132 #>>45008978 #
lcnPylGDnU4H9OF ◴[] No.45003736[source]
What is censorship for the "common" good? The point being that censorship is a top-down thing; it is not a "common" thing by definition.
replies(1): >>45003753 #
1. FirmwareBurner ◴[] No.45003753[source]
Definition of Common good is doing what the political establishment sees as good for preserving their power.

It's not what's good for you, it's what's good for them.

replies(1): >>45003958 #
2. lcnPylGDnU4H9OF ◴[] No.45003958[source]
This is some weird revisionism. The definition of a common good is what's good for a community.
replies(1): >>45005936 #
3. FirmwareBurner ◴[] No.45005936[source]
Your definition is weird idealism from the past that doesn't work in today's corrupt political landscape.
replies(1): >>45017580 #
4. immibis ◴[] No.45017580{3}[source]
Just because politicians are misusing a word to justify corruption doesn't mean the word doesn't have an actual meaning.

There's this weird effect I've noticed where people act like words don't have meanings any more. I don't know what to call it.