shabier

Which part of "So North Korea is doing good then" do you not understand?

Earlier, you said "sure, from their perspective they are" in reply to "So North Korea is doing good then".

I suppose that your agreement with tyrannical dictatorships explains more about you than anyone else.

> because, you know...

No, please, do tell. Does a different stance make you fascist? Or does it make you pro-Putin? Or are you about to accuse me of being paid for taking a different stance?

You've already called me "fcking piece of sht garbage of a human" in a different thread. Ironic.

> the issue is "a literal fascist government is invading a sovereign country and their propaganda machine is in full throttle mode".

Explain to me how you would come to that conclusion if it wasn't for the media? And how would you justify spreading that information if it came from "not really accurate or objective" media? Without being able to cross-check, you're just spreading one-sided gossip, if not rumors like the snake island story.

> can't blame him for fog of war

That's exactly what you should, though. Especially if you're in his position, where the smallest wimp is taken as fact.

> And he didn't call for violence but for response from international community

What exactly would you think the "response" would be if the nuclear plant was actually bombed? You don't have to be a geopolitical expert to know it is violence.

> You seriously bringing up that example in contrast to russian propaganda machine weaponising a completely fabricated story about crucified boy, with intention of evoking deep emotional response

Have you been following the news? Western media is doing exactly that with recent events like the snake island "heroes"?

Yeah, sure, let's completely depend on our own honest media rather than being able to cross-check it with opposing parties. It surely won't create an echo chamber wherein our own media could report whatever they want, it surely won't result in less objective reporting and more propaganda.

So North Korea is doing good then

> Freedom of speech is not freedom of inciting violence and hatred.

Zelensky lied about a Russian shell hitting a nuclear plant and called for retaliation, which is exactly inciting violence. There's a lot of misinformation spread by both sides (Russia and the West) but silencing any of them would be stupid and unfair.

Agreed. It is much easier to be aware of what the other side is thinking and, if the situation or platform allows it, to challenge those ideas.

Just because some commenters disagree with an action doesn't mean they're "pro-Putin". Please refrain from that tribal, binary thinking- it doesn't help the cause.

> Eg. They aired unedited coverages of many of the Trump campaign rallies.

Except when it comes to the controversial topics. CNN is everything but honest or objective

So it is western media but from a Russian POV

> most russians (and more importantly russians abroad) are presented with the same tired old propaganda they always did

I'm going to be thát guy; do you have sources to support that claim? I've been hearing about that sentiment but haven't seen any data about it.

Oh yes, exactly that. This is a slippery slope.

> The only way to stop a bully such as this is to hit them the hardest, most brutal way, earliest.

Only if we had the same attitude against European countries or the US. It really seems like a one-sided stance most of the time.

One of the few times that a European or US (allay) receives similar treatment as they dish out, they completely freak out, making outrageous demands or requests such as the one to ICANN.

> The barrel of options against Russia needs to be exhausted.

Strong disagree, we should just retaliate in any way just for the sake of it- that's just not effective.

edit: formatting

Oh please, the same happened in the US after 9/11, and we all rolled with it. Cut the free speech nonsense, we're (as in big tech) not enforcing it either.

> It doesn't work. > Look at Trump, no? pack of lies from start to finish and half of the USA believes him.

And they're entitled to that. If anything, we're to blame for not being able to make a convincing enough argument against Trump.

> Russians are entitled to what the west decides to give them unless they want to do a better job themselves.

Please get off your high horse, that's just disgusting. Yikes.

> In the West, you have a range of views and there is no deliberate censorship of views by the State. In Russia, you get and only get what the State produces

I would argue that big tech is making an effort to sway public opinion in certain favorable directions, if not outright censor them under the guise of safety or whatever generic excuse we've heard over the past decade. The information we've been digesting is essentially only what big tech allows to be heard.

Yes, there are several ways to access information from alternative methods but from what it seems like, only a fraction of both the West and Russia do that.

By censoring an opposing agenda, albeit anti-west propaganda, you will create exactly the same vacuum as you accuse the Russian government of.

> It is sometimes better to act than not to act, even if what you do is not perfect; it all adds pressure and expresses that you are serious about what you're doing.

Strong disagree. We should do the right thing rather than just anything that could put pressure on them.

> Ok, but what does Russia offer the rest of the internet besides badly written malware ... honeypots full of fuzzing robots?

Does that even matter? The access to the general internet isn't something you have to "earn". You're not more entitled to be in this space more than the next person regardless of your contribution, beliefs or identity.

> The Russian government actively promotes hacking against the west and refuses to prosecute anyone for it.

Our government friends at the NSA are equally guilty of that as well, I'm not seeing much outrage over that either.

> The Russian State is and has been for a long time pushing a profoundly anti-Western agenda.

We've been having our fair share of anti-Russia propaganda as well, we're not innocent of what we're accusing Russia of.

> The Russian people are completely controlled. They have no way, even if they knew exactly what was going on and understood it for what it is, to rally, no one to lead them, no way to resist.

What exactly do you think would happen to the west if we censored Russian "propaganda"?

> I am in favour of both the removal of ".ru" and related domains

... And they'll move to another TLD just as easily as they were booted off the .ru or even worse; it moves outside the scope of the "accessible" web where their ideas are not challenged. Overall, a bad idea, IMO.

Cyberattacks are not limited to borders or geolocation- it can be sent/executed from anywhere at all times. And, like the letter mentioned, the request wasn't to "remove" Russia from the internet but rather restricting access to the routing towards Russian sites.

It wouldn't surprise me if AWS would do just that, given their history.

Regardless of how we feel about the current conflict between the countries, it is absolutely essential to keep the internet open and accessible to everyone, including those who we don't agree with.

I agree with you on that. Isolating them or ourselves from them will only trigger those who're already vulnerable to extremism to be become even more extreme.

Here's a crazier idea; we shouldn't restrict Russia in any way. It's almost a bad idea to silence voices, no matter how much we disagree with them. If anything, it is more important to challenge their propaganda with better, more accurate news debunking theirs.