Show newer

@freemo Even if someone writes something, chances are they won't bother to (really) read it, and it's buried somewhere where hardly anyone will see it.

Olives boosted

If you're wondering why I haven't mentioned age verification (I'm talking about online content here), I don't think that is in scope for this particular consultation, there is one coming up later this year where that might come up. This pertains more to ratings.

For a recap from 2023, Julie wanted it but the Communications Minister overruled her (as there were many privacy concerns around that, and likely, other ones too).

Show thread

It's usually something really strange and stupid, not what you'd expect the reason for banning it to be.

Show thread

No one buys apologia that only the government can censor people. It has always been a dishonest deflection from real discussions pertaining to free expression.

There are two contexts where this can come up. A theoretical context where it is being referenced in an abstract manner. This happens around about 1% of the time.

Or 99% of the time, it is to distract from a controversial moderation decision by refusing to discuss that, because it just so happens to align with the views of whoever is invoking the argument.

No one buys apologia that only the government can censor people. It has always been a dishonest deflection from real discussions pertaining to free expression.

Apparently, it also violates the Fifth Amendment due to due process deficits.

Show thread

Oh, of course they would sneak the TikTok Ban bill into the foreign aid bill. Ugh.

Working in production but not in a test case, huh. Well, better than the opposite, lol.

Olives boosted

Join us for a walk past a number of Boston landmarks on Saturday, May 4, 18:35, at #LibrePlanet 2024: libreplanet.org/2024/other-act

When a bug happens to be acting as a fix for yet another bug, and now, you have another bug to fix.

@glynmoody Typically, the argument brought up for Japan is that censorship violates Article 19 / 21 of the Constitution (it contains a right to free expression).

However, neither the law or this right is limitless. For instance, if someone deliberately makes non-consensual porn of someone (ahem, not an imaginary character), that would be prohibited conduct, from what I've seen. There's more I could say but I'll keep it short for conciseness.

If they're doing that, maybe it's a Western spammer, as someone from there who I know would put it. It's also a bit suspicious, the Brits are hard to trust, they have a bad track record. It is also quite a dubious intervention. Of course, it's not implausible the authorities there tipped the Brits off about it.

If someone wants more American competition to YouTube though, a good start might be to repeal the DMCA and to implement stronger intermediary liability protections whenever copyright is involved. That is one of the biggest obstacles.

Show thread

Banning TikTok entrenches Big Tech at a time when people seem to want more competition.

Blocking Telegram isn't a good idea.

@SirTapTap
qoto.org/@olives/1122637219951
Dear Most Majestic Holy Knight Sir Tap Tap, if you happen to know any Australians, could you please point them towards this government consultation on censorship?

Chasing bugs. They're hiding inside this program somewhere.

Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.