this post was submitted on 31 Aug 2024
271 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37708 readers
424 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org 65 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It's nice to see that some non-US countries are willing to stand up to this fascist turd.

[–] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org 25 points 2 months ago

Oh no.

Suppressing fascism.

Awful.

Let me grab my tissues.

[–] thingsiplay@beehaw.org 64 points 2 months ago (3 children)
[–] ShadowRam@fedia.io 26 points 2 months ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] don@lemm.ee 15 points 2 months ago

Um, excuse me, but I’m very well known for rexing awesome xs on x, and will definitely subx you for what you’ve lemmied here.

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 10 points 2 months ago (2 children)

They have at least moved away from the twitter.com URL, up until then it was hard to argue that it wasn't still Twitter. However, until they come up with a new name for "tweets" I think the original name should still stand.

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 23 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 2 months ago
[–] Banichan@dormi.zone 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

"Tweets" is a permanent label of the short form message post. Changing it to "posts" is like calling text messages "essays".

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 10 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Yes and no. It only really applies to Twitter/X and Twitter clones. You wouldn't call a Facebook post a tweet, no matter how short, nor would you call a reddit or lemmy post/comment that.

And even then, Mastadon has its own term, toots, and BlueSky calls them skeets.

Until Twitter comes up with a new name in line with their new branding, I think the business should still be referred to as Twitter. But the business should go bankrupt before that happens, hopefully, the lenders need to call in their debts already.

[–] key@lemmy.keychat.org 6 points 2 months ago (8 children)

Why are the alternatives all so defecatory...

[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 6 points 2 months ago

Because of enshittification lol

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pipows@lemmy.today 55 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (7 children)

Brazilian here. This a controversial topic, so take what I say as an opinion.

Although Musk is a man child and a scumbag, he is right on this. He is not refusing to comply with local laws, he is refusing to comply with illegal, monocratic decisions from the supreme court.

It is not news that the supreme court had given themselves dictator-like powers. In this case, there is no law that mandates that a social network has to have legal representatives in the country, and there is no law that a social network has to censor specific person, unless they are commiting a crime, which of course require a investigation and the due legal process, all steps that the supreme court had ignored. Moreover, the supreme court is not persecution, so they can't just make this decision without being summoned.

They've been doing that for a while now, in the name of fighting "anti-democratic acts", which is just a faceless ghost. This is, again, based on no law whatsoever, so the supreme court had taken for themselves persecution and legislative powers, gravely hurting the separation of powers.

Disclaimer: I'm not right leaning, but I'm as libertarian as one can be

[–] salmoura@lemmy.eco.br 40 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I'm not right leaning, but I'm as libertarian as one can be

A right-winger, then? Cool, keep us posted.

[–] pipows@lemmy.today 6 points 2 months ago (6 children)

Libertarian is not right-wing (at least as what right-wing and libertarian means here, maybe it is not the same in the US?)

The right is conservative. It is religion based, against the liberation of drugs, usually not concerned with LGBT or women rights. Libertarianism is none of this, since it most concerned with individual freedom

[–] Caligvla@lemmy.dbzer0.com 47 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Libertarianism is a right-wing ideology though, it's pro corporate deregulation and lasseiz-faire capitalism. If you're pro individual freedom, but opposed to right-wing ideas then the closest thing you can be is an Anarchist.

[–] FlashMobOfOne@beehaw.org 7 points 2 months ago (5 children)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] John_McMurray@beehaw.org 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Neither of those concepts are right wing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 22 points 2 months ago (2 children)

It's all about individual freedom until you start asking libertarians about the rights of kids and contractual indentured servitude.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LukeZaz@beehaw.org 18 points 2 months ago (5 children)

I don't know if libertarianism courts a different audience in Brazil, but in the U.S. it has a very rabidly right-wing audience who effectively want to tear down as much government as possible, and who view "your freedom ends at my face" as an insult. It's the ideology of an extraordinarily unregulated market – a true "free market" – which is a monopolistic and wildly unethical disaster waiting to happen.

Anarcho-capitalism, which your username references, is all of that, only more. So you might understand why effectively everyone here is going to treat that with extreme suspicion.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] arthur@lemmy.zip 12 points 2 months ago

Yeah, that can be different in other places. From a brazilian perspective, there is no "left" on US mainstream politics. There is only fascist-right, conservative right and center-right.

[–] John_McMurray@beehaw.org 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Libertarianism isn't right wing in the states either. It got lumped in there to make it easier to mock them.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] TWeaK@lemm.ee 19 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Law isn't defined just by legislation, it is also defined by case law. A judge's ruling on a previous case makes that ruling law.

Now, I'm not saying this ruling is appropriate - I simply don't know enough about how it came to be. But if Brazil made laws about social media companies and then a judge made a ruling based on that law requiring social media companies have a representative, then that absolutely is valid law.

To draw an example, the EU never made a law about cookie splash screens. The EU made GDPR law (well, strictly speaking they made a directive, then member states make laws that must meet or exceed that directive), and then a judge interpreted that law and made it a requirement to have cookie splash screens. I would personally argue that the judge was trying to shove a square peg through a round hole there, when really he should have identified that data collection is in fact a secondary transaction hidden in the fine print (rather than an exchange of data for access to the service, this isn't how the deal is presented to the user; the service is offered free of charge but the fine print says your data is surrendered free of charge), and he should have made it such that users get paid for the data that's being collected. However, the judge's ruling stands as law now.

[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 6 points 2 months ago (3 children)

A judge's ruling on a previous case makes that ruling law.

Not everywhere.

Previous rulings are a precedent in Common Law systems like the US, UK, Canada, or Australia.

Only Supreme Court rulings become a precedent in Civil Law systems like the EU, Russia,most of the rest of America.

To draw an example, the EU never made a law about cookie splash screens.

A very poor example; Privacy and Electronic Communications Directive 2002/58/EC.

The EU at its top level creates "Directives", which member states then are bound to transpose into their national Civil Law systems. Judges can interprete that law in different ways, none of which creates a precedent. Only a country's Supreme Court decision creates a precedent for that country, but even then it can be recurred up to the EU Tribunal, which has the last saying.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 2 months ago

You're right on the fact you're not right leaning. Libertarian are far right.

[–] elfpie@beehaw.org 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] pipows@lemmy.today 6 points 2 months ago

I'll look into it further tomorrow. If I find out that I'm wrong, I'll edit my comment saying so.

[–] John_McMurray@beehaw.org 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah but reality doesn't matter here. Good luck

[–] pipows@lemmy.today 6 points 2 months ago

I would not put it like that, I'm not that arrogant. Lemmy is, in its majority, left leaning, so of course people will disagree with me, but that's not to say "reality doesn't matter".

I'm really surprised that my post was not down voted to nothingness

[–] krolden@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I bet you voted for bolsonaro

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tilefan@lemm.ee 51 points 2 months ago (1 children)

finally a fucking headline that mentions the problem

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] jarfil@beehaw.org 38 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

This is going to get interesting:

The decision imposes a daily fine of R$50,000 (£6,800) on individuals and companies that attempt to continue using X via VPN.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/30/elon-musk-x-could-face-ban-in-brazil-after-failure-to-appoint-legal-representative

[–] Caligvla@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Honestly, I have mixed feelings on this. On the one hand, that's the government reaching waaaay beyond what it should without any real laws to back it up, on the other hand, fuck Musk and if this is what it takes to keep gullible people off nazifascist misinformation and propaganda then 🤷‍♂️.

[–] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 25 points 2 months ago (8 children)

The law doesn't function the same everywhere. When you start/run an international business, it is necessary to understand this. When you don't, things like this happen.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] vk6flab@lemmy.radio 25 points 2 months ago (4 children)

And many of them are heading to BlueSky..

[–] beepnoise@piefed.social 16 points 2 months ago

Well tbf I'm seeing the introdução hashtag trending on Mastodon (on my server it is second)

I think I saw some new faces on Mastodon as well.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 2 months ago

more countries need to do the same and get twitter to shut down everywhere

[–] Rooskie91@discuss.online 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Wow so Brazil has the freest democracy now?

[–] xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Lula Brazil is very different from bolsonaro Brazil

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›