This is a textbook example of an authoritarian government banning media outlets that allow criticism.
It's unbelievable that anyone can hate Facebook so much that they side with authoritarian regimes.
It's unbelievable that anyone can hate Facebook so much that they side with authoritarian regimes.
Who is doing that here? 2 Things can be bad at the same time. Just because people are critical of FB in the west it doesn't mean they support authoritarian regimes.
I think that very well captures 95% of the effect.
I also think the 5% which doesn't fit relates to the individual profit motive. I don't know how users of social media profit in the spirit of the CAP. I would replace "profit motive" with "ignorance that their passive involvement enables" the destructive direction social media is heading.
There was much less difference between a government and a corporation if you happened to deal with the East India Company, or US worker towns of old.
It is simply a deflection from the central point that frequently the state will involve itself in things that it really shouldn't be involving itself in. This is frequenly because it must justify its ever increasing size. Saying that the state should have well defined responsibilities shouldn't be controversial. What those should be is a different conversation.
However I have no such choice when it comes to Government. Whatever they choose to decide I have to abide by or face fines, jail and other reprocussions. Some of those decisions maybe just which aren't a problem. However some of them maybe unjust. If those decisions are unjust I have almost no direct way to address it especially if I am in the minority.
I don't use Facebook, but it still has a huge impact on my life.
What device would you use? How would you find information? It’s all possible, but not straightforward. There is likely a good sci-fi or black mirror plot in here somewhere.
If I don't want to use Windows or MacOS, I can use an alternative operating system. If I don't want to use Google's search engine there are many other alternatives. If I don't want to use a companies webmail solution I can setup my own.
It is very simple to not deal with these tech companies.
You may find it easy, and well done if so.
Every step you have listed there is quite hard, even if you let some through (Apple in my case). Some of the things you are cutting out are very good, and that’s how they get you.
There is still lots of stuff I kinda have to use but I've managed to massively reduce my use of most of this stuff.
Obviously if your job/business relies on using this stuff then you gotta use it. I wouldn't advocate that you put yourself out on the street for the source code freedoms.
I have personally concluded that there is no practical difference between credulity and corruptability - both make it easy to get them to support and commit evil. I can only conclude that a lack of critical thinking is a moral flaw in itself as strange it may sound at first blush. But really if greed can get people to do bad things nobody would deny that it is a moral flaw so why should credulity be any different?
Who exactly is siding with an authoritarian regime here? The article indicates it was a unilateral decision on the part of the government. The article also states:
>I't has drawn a heated response from the Government's opponents, with Opposition leader Matthew Wale labelling the ban "pathetic" and unjust."