Readit Newsliopleurodon commented on Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices theguardian.com/world/art... · Posted by u/jjgreen
It is still perfectly possible to access RT from Spain, even using regular ISP DNS servers.
That's not my experience with Movistar, they are throwing down the gauntlet
liopleurodon commented on Israel shuts down local Al Jazeera offices theguardian.com/world/art... · Posted by u/jjgreen
Do you have examples for Europe blocking Russia? Because all I have seen is DNS providers omitting certain sites (i.e RT), but their apps still work (plus URLs when using other DNS). An nothing of that coming from the nation states as all seems to be due to the activities of private companies doing these things.
It's part of the EU sanctions, EU ISPs are required to block certain Russian sites. But they didn't specify how, that's left up to the countries to figure out afaik. But as you say, some of the what has been done barely qualifies.
Here's my personal experience with this:
Germany does exactly what you describe, the bare minimum to say "we're blocking" --- DNS omitting certain sites.
Spain is doing deep packet inspection, blocking DNS requests that lookup RT, so DNS over HTTPS or through a VPN is a must. Additionally, they're also reading the SNI in TLS requests and blocking that way. If you try accessing RT in pure unencrypted HTTP you're get some fortigate blocking message back.
liopleurodon commented on Facebook Is Ending Support for PGP Encrypted Emails joltmailer.com/facebook-e... · Posted by u/Rokid
I doubt that this was widely adopted
Hell, even amongst my peers, I'm continually shocked at how many people have never used gpg, ever. And, anecdotally, the number gets lower as age gets lower. Young people aren't using it. It's dying.
liopleurodon commented on Slack is retiring its status account on X theverge.com/2023/10/19/2... · Posted by u/CharlesW
> Nobody cares
That’s a mental shortcut. Social circle you decided to be in doesn’t care.
On the other hand I did research on WhatsApp vs. alternatives and decided to promote Telegram. Sure, it’s not that/very secure, but UX is on completely different level than Signal. It was much easier to transition people on aesthetics alone in comparison to Signal which has its own “quirks” (making sense from security standpoint but perceived as anti-features for casual user e.g. history transfer).
>Social circle you decided to be in doesn't care.
I didn't choose the family I was born into, lol
charge with what energy?
they shut down their nuke plants and the nordstream pipelines were destroyed by Biden (an act of war btw, but somehow Russia's their enemy and we're their ally)
Or, like, Twitter? I mean it's interesting to see the white hot outrage and political concern burning everywhere over 'rich billionaire owns social media platform.'
I mean Zuck must be the devil himself by now then... Or is it Musk's ideological views creating such consternation? In which case, also interesting to see the federal interest.
another great example, yes
What do you think the Biden administration would do if they were ignored? Arrest the CEO? Revoke Twitter's corporate charter? Please.
The US government has a history of going after people that say no to them or that they don't like, yes. Qwest is a great example
liopleurodon commented on Moderation is different from censorship astralcodexten.substack.c... · Posted by u/feross
Yes, back when Voat still existed, /r/TheDonald tried to move to Voat. Then they moved back to Reddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/c5urdn/what_i...
Apparently /r/TheDonald was very used to being in a safe space. Voat didn't cater to that, and TheDonald couldn't take that so eventually they returned to Reddit.
This was before their separate website.
Oh dang, interesting
This is illustrates the extent and magnitude of the problem to fix the internet. That regulators failed to give enough oversight of the internet and to regulate its monopolistic players several decades ago when these problems first became obvious has meant that they are now almost insurmountable.
Ideally, Google would be forced to divest itself of Chrome and that Chrome would become an open source project a la Linux. Clearly, that's very unlikely to happen.
For those who'd argue that Chrome would have no funding to further develop I'd respond by saying that it already works well as a browser and from observation that Google is channeling most of Chrome's development funds into anti-features that are hostile to users.
As an open source project that level of funding would be no longer necessary and its future development could progress at a slower pace.