Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It's simple, the EU wants it's own internet like China. No more filthy US internet with talk about free speech and fair use.


I see part of your argument, but the internet in the US is by no means full of free speech and fair use. The government has their hands on every major service provider and ISP and has used their power to compel companies to give information or censor data.

What's happening here is the EU is seeing every other major power lock down their internet, so why would they leave theirs open which would also allow foreign meddling?

Additionally the tech megacorps are trying to claim that they are open platforms and so shouldn't be responsible for user posted data while censoring and removing user posted data when it suits their economic means.

I'm a proponent of free speech, but the internet stopped being a bastion of free speech year ago. It's crazy to think that the EU was going to sit their and let companies do what they please, when those same companies we're already preventing users/EU citizens from doing so


Ah yes, the ol "but China is building a digital dystopia so we should too" argument. A classic.


Ah the old, let's imply your racist/afraid so you let american companies do as they please argument.

It's easy to be trite, but it doesn't change the fact that foreign companies and governments were taking advantage of the EU while simultaneously having a different set of rules at home for EU companies. I think the EU overreacted her, hut it's hardly surprising that they had some sort of response


The whole thread should be about the EU response and how negative it will be for most EU citizens but have less of an impact on the intended targets, aka large corporations who can afford to be compliant.

I think arguing over who has the most censored internet or the worst corporations is probably starting to veer off topic.


I think the point here is to understand why such a response occurred. So it's very much on topic. Nobody is denying that this is generally a bad thing for the commoners. But when you put it into perspective, what the US and China have been doing are also very bad. So this is nothing out of the ordinary really.


I agree. I don't even think that this is a good response by the EU. I was mostly commenting on how you shouldn't be surprised that they had _a_ response when other powers are locking down their internet and foreign companies we're running rough shod over EU laws and directives.

I think its all stemming from the same response as a portion of people who voted for Trump, or why the GPDR was enacted. The status quo was being abused by the major players and now they are going to do _something_ to shake up the system. Whether their approach is the right thing to do is up for debate


US has a huge surveillance (both govt and private) problem, but censorship? Can you give some examples?


Maybe "Napalm Girl" v Facebook, as an example how chilling effects and cultural differences can lead to an outcome which is perceived as censorship in Europe?



Simple: Are you able to find any ISIS-supporting website out in the open? What is the fundamental difference between this and the Chinese internet censorship for the sake of national security? I see only total hypocrisy and double standards here. Just admit that every country has their own set of laws regulating the internet and that the US is no different. Or are people so institutionalized that they don't even realize the countless censoring going on around the place?


1. Reddit on the topic of Donald Trump is an example.

2. Forcing social media firms to delete specific kinds of content is another (albeit controversial) example.

3. Redacting all info about Saudi involvement in the 9-11 reports is a great example of censorship under the pretext of national security.

4. The SESTA/FOSTA bills are a recent (but again somewhat controversial) example.

5. Plenty of movies have been censored. One can easily google examples of this.

6. Many works of music too. Just ask the rappers.

7. Forbidding swear words in public/recorded speech is/was a great example. Although it is also an example of self-censorship among Americans.


Classifying government documents is not censorship, since it's not government suppressing anyone's speech. It's strictly a transparency issue.

All of your other examples involve private censorship (which can be rephrased as "people and companies exercising their property rights and freedom of association"), not government censorship.


If you know about it, it's a felony to talk about it. That particular one was a huge omission that might have shifted national debate in a different direction, esp who U.S. would target in a war or sanction. I still remember the advertisements on the radio talking about how great Saudi Arabia is and how good buddies we are. Be a different picture if U.S. media said they were a huge sponsor of violent religion and terrorism with that part of 9/11 report highlighted for all to see.

Definitely an example of mandated censorship, corruption, and maybe some kind of conspiracy. Maybe protecting politicians' and Saudi's interests at everyone else's expense. Even if it kills a bunch of us. If that's how they use the power, they don't deserve to have it.


What?

"4. The SESTA/FOSTA bills are a recent (but again somewhat controversial) example."

Where exactly is that private censorship?


Twitter is now banning promoted tweets with the legal term "illegal alien"


I'd upvote you, but my Verizon Ultra G5 Package does not allow for upvoting.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: