0 users browsing Discussion. | 1 guest | 2 bots  
Main » Discussion » Something about cheese!
Pages: First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next Last
Posted on 19-03-19, 16:40
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #99 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
I might be mistaken about Telstra, but isn't it a regional monopoly? In such cases, someone desiring Internet access has no choice but to use their service.

The filtering is on a DNS level, so there is no actual interference done. In general, the censorship (not talking about Australia now) is surprisingly efficient. Googling "christchurch video" nets no relevant results, and even good old LiveLeak has fallen (although to be fair, they started censoring content a long time ago)

For someone with about average tech skills and only a smartphone, to find it would probably be quite difficult. That the cat's already out of the bag if anything makes it less bad, not worse. Considering it's a very important primary source for a current news event, I feel the people have a right to know what is going on and not get it censored, in order to be able to form their own opinions. If the censorship actually were successful, we wouldn't be living very far off from Orwell's dystopia where the past gets retconned on seemingly arbitrary grounds. (That said, being incompetent doesn't make you an upstanding moral citizen, just incompetent)

It would be very concerning if the only ones who had access to primary sources were the media, who you then would just have to trust unconditionally to not get anything wrong, no? I can go to a public library and borrow Mein Kampf if I feel like it, and I can do this because it is my right as a citizen to retrieve such information in order to be able to form an opinion. Why is the matter suddenly different when digital?

I understand the argument about privacy, but the material is shot in a public space and of (involuntarily) public figures, and as such it shouldn't apply. I can't see that it would have a lower probability of getting taken down if you were to blur the faces out anyway, so it just feels dishonest to argue the point.

They might not be able to block encryption, but they sure could prosecute you for sending and receiving encrypted content. The GFW even can block most proxies. If they would prosecute people instead of just cutting the connection, it wouldn't be very hard to reach 100% efficiency, since you'd only have to slip up once.

And for a country that has already banned encryption and anonymous prepaid SIM cards, it's not that big a leap. After all, just think of the childrenwhite supremacists...

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-19, 23:11

Post: #100 of 210
Since: 10-29-18

Last post: 277 days
Last view: 248 days
Telstra was once a monopoly in terms of owning all the phone lines for ISPs to rent, but now we have the National Broadband Network created by the government. This was supposed to be Fibre to the Node for everyone (replacing all the copper wiring from ~100 years ago) as proposed by Labor, but much of this proposed infrastructure has been replaced with Fibre to the Curb, two Satellites and Wireless towers as proposed with replaced plans by the Liberal government.

I'm sure Screwtape could go into more detail with this.
Posted on 19-03-20, 23:30
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #103 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
(Reply to Screwtape's post in the Mozilla thread)
Posted by Screwtape

Indian film-makers might be using western-made cameras and editing equipment, but Indian cinema is very much its own thing, distinct from the genres and tropes of Western cinema. A huge chunk of the Indian software industry is devoted to handling outsourced tasks from the West, but do you really think no Indian software developers would think to use their skills for problems they themselves face, or problems they see in society around them?

Well, the issue is moreso that there are no skills to use for any purpose whatsoever, whether domestic or international. I've seen some Indian-developed smartphone ROMs, but that's not really programming. I never argued there isn't any Indian culture (there is), but I have argued there is no Indian/Chinese technological innovation.


If you're going to argue that economically weaker nations always wind up as pale imitations of the stronger nations they trade with, I'd like to remind you that America was once a poor little nation that imported all its technology from Britain, and they've had quite a sizable influence on world culture and technology since that time.

I'm specifically talking about technology. Economy isn't the only factor at play here. Look for instance at the oil countries in the Middle East. They have lots of money, but they achieve almost nothing with it, and rather just spend it on imports and such. Absolutely nothing is created there, and they shouldn't even exist. The only impact Saudi Arabia has on my life is that it funds terrorism, increasing the likelihood thereof, which in turn has a very slight indirect impact on my life (for instance, longer wait times at the airport).

America was with regards to culture, civilization, and people a straight copy-paste of Europe, and as such in the long run could be expected to perform about on the same level as Europe. I would argue it has, although trading higher volatility for higher reward - higher average income, but more poor people. Whether this is better or worse is a philosophical question.


It's not about "rising up against their capitalist masters". If anything, it's about *preventing* such a thing.

For China and India, maybe. Africa is doomed, I think. The culture is completely wrecked, the few prosperous nations sooner or later get pulled back down into the mud, and the only thing there of value is natural resources. Not exactly a recipe for success.


Generally, economically weaker nations tend to follow in the steps of the economically stronger nations they trade with, but they don't always *stay* economically weaker, and there's a tipping point where a large number of people with tech-level X can be economically stronger than a small number of people with tech-level X+1.


Technology and population are both economic multipliers. There's a bunch of countries that are weak despite having large populations, because of their low tech level. Their tech levels are growing very, very quickly, and soon they'll be strong enough to do whatever they want. From a progressive point of view, it'd be really nice if those countries could learn from our mistakes rather than repeating them. From an economic point of view, it'd be really nice if those countries shared fundamental values with us, like egalitarianism and democracy rather than, say, authoritarianism. At the very least, we'd like them to think of us as the people that helped them grow up, rather than the people that held them down, and dismissed them as cheap and dirty.

It might be a bit late for China, what with communist dictatorship and all, but democracy has had a pretty good track record versus dictatorships (albeit a bit bruised since 2016) but there's hope yet.


Well, yes, that's one route. I, for one, welcome our new Chinese overlords, but it's not the only one. There's an assumption, that they will reward us for helping them, which I frankly don't think is true. We're going to get thrown under the bus the second we are of no use to them, perhaps excepting those individuals who played important roles in their ascent to power although probably not - at least I hope not, and Westerners in China are already starting to notice the climate getting harsher. And also that it was inevitable.

I don't believe in either of these. The moving of Western industry to China was due to enormous incompetence among the Western leaders, along with skillful manipulation on the part of the Chinese. The transfer of technology due to state-run industrial espionage, along with the willful blindness of the West. ("look, they're just like us, they even have iPhones!")

Authoritarianism has the advantage that there are no bothersome internal obstacles for a government to overcome. If the Chinese wish to start doing industrial espionage, they just go. Here, it would become a political scandal, and politicians would lose office due to tremendous shortsightedness on the part of the electorate. It has the disadvantage of being rather unpleasant for its subjects, why civilized nations don't practice it. But to protect the might of the state both internal and external, it does seem superior.

I think you're looking at this from too small a perspective. If the East doesn't learn from our mistakes, the biggest risk isn't them killing a few million of their own Uighurs or whatever, which is their own business, but rather that we are forced to live under their system. If what you describe were to happen, it would be disastrous for human civilization. The only hope is that politicians wisen up (haha, who am I kidding) or that it turns out the Chinese economy was a bubble all along. In all other scenarios I can see, we are simply fucked.

I agree with your assessment of China though. The country has simply been ruined by the cultural revolution. Nothing can be done about it, but at least the culture remains in Taiwan. There was a great serpentza video on the matter, but I can't seem to find it now.

I don't think 2016 was an indictment of democracy. As good as it sounds on paper and is "in peacetime," when dealing with the kinds of issues the West has now, it more or less is required to start fighting dirty lest even worse things for democracy were to happen. Even though Trump failed at almost everything he set out to accomplish, at least he showed that there was another way.

If it's any consolation, I suppose America was and will be the hardest hit by this new development, and also those who played the largest role in making it happen. It's still sad for their population, though.

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-26, 14:39
Post: #27 of 134
Since: 11-24-18

Last post: 42 days
Last view: 6 hours
So. EU just brainfarted and voted for even more draconian laws (anyone surprised)?

Highlights from the adopted legislation:

* Link tax mandatory
* Screening of user content mandatory
* The copyright of any recording from any sporting event belong to the sporting event arranger.

The only comfort is that this will further erode public support for copyright completely...
Posted on 19-03-26, 15:52
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #131 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
Posted by wertigon
So. EU just brainfarted and voted for even more draconian laws (anyone surprised)?

Highlights from the adopted legislation:

* Link tax mandatory
* Screening of user content mandatory
* The copyright of any recording from any sporting event belong to the sporting event arranger.

The only comfort is that this will further erode public support for copyright completely...


I hope more websites start doing like the American newspapers and just rangeban Europe. Problem solved, you reap what you sow.

On another note, it boggles the mind how the EU manages to come up with a great idea (GDPR, albeit the implementation was somewhat ham-fisted) and then follow up almost instantly with an atrociously poor idea that never should have gotten past the drawing board. Are they schizophrenic?

As much as I hate to admit it, there's a grand total of one country in the world with sane copyright laws, and it's China.

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-26, 18:08

Post: #54 of 100
Since: 10-30-18

Last post: 182 days
Last view: 23 days
> As much as I hate to admit it, there's a grand total of one country in the world with sane copyright laws, and it's China.

It's funny because it's true!
Posted on 19-03-27, 03:01

Post: #49 of 88
Since: 11-04-18

Last post: 282 days
Last view: 282 days
Posted by sureanem
Posted by https://twitter.com/Telstra_news/status/1107526963583844353

We've started temporarily blocking a number of sites that are hosting footage of Friday’s terrorist attack in Christchurch. We understand this may inconvenience some legitimate users of these sites, but these are extreme circumstances and we feel this is the right thing to do.

According to a Reddit thread, that would be 4chan, 8chan, Voat, Bitchute, and Zerohedge.

Man, it sure feels great when a monopoly ISP blocks websites on completely arbitrary grounds. Good luck getting the free market to fix that one for you.

Oh well, it's fine, they can't block all the encrypted VPNs. It's like nailing Jello to a wall, right?

First they came for the socialistspirates...


oi mate, you've got a loicense for that VPN?

and now apparently Australia wants to scare the big tech companies with jail if they don't comply with their rules
https://gizmodo.com/australia-absolutely-considering-jail-time-for-tech-exe-1833578817

are they also going to try to censor things like the WTC towers' destruction? seems pretty inconsistent
Posted on 19-03-27, 04:58
Custom title here

Post: #366 of 890
Since: 10-30-18

Last post: 4 days
Last view: 14 hours
Well, I mean... are any of the social networks they're targeting based in Australia? Seems like a pretty toothless law to me.


--- In UTF-16, where available. ---
Posted on 19-03-27, 05:53

Post: #50 of 88
Since: 11-04-18

Last post: 282 days
Last view: 282 days
Posted by CaptainJistuce
Well, I mean... are any of the social networks they're targeting based in Australia? Seems like a pretty toothless law to me.


right, I don't see how that would work either. threatening them with huge fines is usually the way to go, like in Germany https://www.engadget.com/2018/01/01/germanys-hefty-hate-speech-fines-for-social-networks-start-toda/
Posted on 19-03-27, 15:26
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #137 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
Posted by CaptainJistuce
Well, I mean... are any of the social networks they're targeting based in Australia? Seems like a pretty toothless law to me.

Is The Washington Post based in Europe?

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-27, 21:46
Custom title here

Post: #367 of 890
Since: 10-30-18

Last post: 4 days
Last view: 14 hours
Posted by sureanem
Posted by CaptainJistuce
Well, I mean... are any of the social networks they're targeting based in Australia? Seems like a pretty toothless law to me.

Is The Washington Post based in Europe?
They are being nice. It isn't exactly hard to find a site that doesn't have cookie popup nag screens.

--- In UTF-16, where available. ---
Posted on 19-03-27, 22:14
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #140 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
No, but those are generally small and obscure websites who think they can play fast and loose with the GDPR and get away with it. They also happen to be right, but if the EU wished to make an example out of them they could fine them.

Do you think Google is being nice? How about Facebook?

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-27, 22:21
Custom title here

Post: #368 of 890
Since: 10-30-18

Last post: 4 days
Last view: 14 hours
Google and Facespace actually have european subsidiaries, if only because they use Ireland as a tax shelter.

I don't think they have australian offices. Even if they do, no one with actual authority works in them.



You are not bound by the laws of a nation you aren't in. The EU cannot actually fine the Washington Post any more than the US can arrest those guys in India calling from "the technical support department of Windows".

--- In UTF-16, where available. ---
Posted on 19-03-27, 23:12
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #141 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
Huh, apparently they have a real office there, but it can't do anything. I'm surprised, I'd have thought they at least had some minor powers. They sometimes give interviews to the press explaining why they did this or that or talk to the government, but apparently it's not their own actions they're defending.
Strange, although I guess it makes sense from a business perspective.
Posted by https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/how-facebook-australia-doesn-t-operate-facebook-in-australia-20180323-p4z5ym.html

The response he got from the social media behemoth left him shocked - not only did Facebook Australia say it did not have authorisation to access his user records or take action about content on Facebook.com, it also claimed to not "control or operate the website".

In Australia's case, unless Facebook there has some contractor-type agreement they could auction off their actual offices, or whatever other property they have in their country. For The Washington Post, their foreign bureaus could get seized.

Sure, they could run everything abroad with as little property actually in the country, but nobody wants to be living on the edge when it comes to the law. Especially not large companies.

For smaller companies that have absolutely no business in Europe, they wouldn't be able to collect on it. But they still could be sued over something that took place in another country that was legal in that country, at least in theory. It's absurd - whenever North Korea does something like that, they're laughed out of the proverbial room (that they weren't in anyway), but when Europe claims jurisdiction over the entire world it's considered perfectly normal.

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-27, 23:47
Custom title here

Post: #370 of 890
Since: 10-30-18

Last post: 4 days
Last view: 14 hours
I admit to being surprised Facebook has an australian office, but not at the office's impotence. It probably only exists to make ad and data sales easier.

So they could arrest someone, but no one that matters. Zuckerburg doesn't care that Joe Aussie is in the county jail, though the main office's legal department probably won't miss the opportunity to remind the feds down under of their complete inability to interact with Facebook on a meaningful level.


Fines they would at least stand a slim chance of getting, though they'd be small enough that the big data-gathering services/social networks wouldn't care at all.

--- In UTF-16, where available. ---
Posted on 19-03-28, 00:06
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #144 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
Well, if they wanted to arrest someone that wouldn't be under the GDPR anyway. And their executives might have to plan their holidays differently.

The GDPR fines are actually quite high. $20 million or 4% of global turnover, whichever is highest. For Facebook that's $2.2 billion, or about 10% of global net profit. It would also be piss-poor optics, since Australia is a well-respected first world country.

It's possible they could get away with it, but why bother taking the risk when you could just delete a few videos and save millions in the process? Of course, it won't be the last time. Say Facebook wants to make some inroads on the China expansion, then it's an expedient move to just hit a few buttons. Heck, they won't even need to delete it, just make it appear low enough on the timeline that it doesn't reach criticality.

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-28, 01:29 (revision 1)
Custom title here

Post: #371 of 890
Since: 10-30-18

Last post: 4 days
Last view: 14 hours
Posted by sureanem
Well, if they wanted to arrest someone that wouldn't be under the GDPR anyway.

Indeed. Australia isn't part of the EU, and they don't base their law on the EU's, as we can tell from their desire to jail social network executives over offensive content.


And their executives might have to plan their holidays differently.
Who would willingly vacation in AUSTRALIA?


--- In UTF-16, where available. ---
Posted on 19-03-28, 13:08 (revision 1)

Post: #68 of 161
Since: 10-29-18

Last post: 65 days
Last view: 10 days
Posted by wertigon
So. EU just brainfarted and voted for even more draconian laws (anyone surprised)?

Highlights from the adopted legislation:

* Link tax mandatory
* Screening of user content mandatory
* The copyright of any recording from any sporting event belong to the sporting event arranger.

The only comfort is that this will further erode public support for copyright completely...


Welp...nice knowing you youTube.

Honestly, not surprising, but still disappointing. Regarding article 13 I don't care if Europe wants to pass this stuff, but the problem is -the internet being what it is, a lot of those things are going to be applied world wide even if YT is based in the U.S. I don't know if I buy the whole "MEPs accidentally voting the wrong way" thing...Well they either did, in which case, they, you know, probably shouldn't be MEPs, or they did not accidentally entered the wrong vote and are just saying that to avoid getting heat.
Posted on 19-03-28, 18:11
Stirrer of Shit
Post: #145 of 717
Since: 01-26-19

Last post: 163 days
Last view: 162 days
The voting system in the EU is an utter joke. It's the epitome of "one job". A committee of educated people sat down, thought about how they were going to design their shiny new parliament, and this is what they came up with:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmXJhGK4cr0

Unless you're saying they didn't think about how to design it and just winged it, but that's even worse.

As for this specific referendum, you had to vote YES to oppose Article 13 and NO to back it. With buttons designed in accordance with the common UX principle of "as similar to each other and close together as possible," it's no wonder mistakes happen.

How do they vote? In most parliaments, buttons tend to be color-coded. In the EU? That's right, you guessed it, three identical gray buttons next to each other with colored stickers. Now that's what I call robust.

If you don't have a list prepared beforehand, it's completely impossible to know what you're voting for. And if you do have a list, then what's the point of introducing another extremely error-prone step where you try and transcribe it and hope you don't mess it up? Could just demolish the parliament, have them mail in their votes, and save on travel costs.

Man, "I pressed the wrong button" is something that's supposed to happen in third world countries with rampant voter fraud, not in stable and developed first world countries. What the hell were they thinking? It's as if someone saw the U.S. Congress, and said to themselves, "hey, how can we take the absolute worst parts of this system and build them into an entirely new system?," and then went ahead and did just that. What the hell were they thinking?

There was a certain photograph about which you had a hallucination. You believed that you had actually held it in your hands. It was a photograph something like this.
Posted on 19-03-28, 21:25
Custom title here

Post: #374 of 890
Since: 10-30-18

Last post: 4 days
Last view: 14 hours
I kind of love that the law has them appending a list of known vote errors to the tally, but not correcting them.


--- In UTF-16, where available. ---
Pages: First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next Last
Main » Discussion » Something about cheese!
Yes, it's an ad.