this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2024
743 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

59612 readers
2975 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

That’s an arbitrary metric. What about internet across oceans, or across forests? Blocking content is a question of why and what. Shouldn’t we be able to block child exploitation websites? That is to say, of course we can, and it’s very easy. The only question is whether you want that kind of censorship to be up to your service provider or your government.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Governments tend to block things like facts about genocides they have committed and opposing political opinions. I would hope things like child exploitation could be managed at the host level.

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Do you have any idea how eagerly AT&T and Comcast would block half the internet if they had the tiniest profit motive to do so? I wonder how long left wing websites would remain online if it weren’t illegal for multinational corporations to block them.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world -5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's the thing, they is no profit motive to block wide swaths of public viewpoint because that will cost them customers. They will quickly lose business to a competitor who doesn't do that. (Local monopolies aside, which is an entirely different problem).

[–] yeahiknow3@lemmings.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I wish you were right, but you’re not. Internet providers have monopolies because the cost of laying fiber or launching satellites is so high. That’s precisely what the argument over net neutrality has been about.

[–] ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world -1 points 2 months ago

They have monopolies because we let them. I say nationalize all communication infrastructure.