Measure internet censorship. Contribute to the world's largest open dataset on internet censorship. Install OONI Probe on Desktop and Mobile platforms
162 comments
You can see this directly in online forums (including this one), unpopular truths are routinely flagged to the point where it doesn't matter that discussion could have happened, it effectively can't- and not because the points don't make sense or can't be reasoned with... but because it doesn't feel good that it's true.
So, unfortunately, I think censorship is inevitable.. I guess it's better to have censorship from a small group of people for a small group of people instead of having censorship from a small group of people to a nation-wide group of people though.
Edit: it must have been added recently since there's proper data now. But most of the CUII list is still not.
You can build your own lists and share them using ooni run: https://run.ooni.org/
I'd wager the vast majority of internet censorship is within platform, like that done by Reddit mods.
The most egregious example I've seen in my lifetime was when old Twitter decided to censor a NYPost article, down to blocking sharing in DMs.
It seems that type of example is entirely missed here. Is there any attempt to capture that signal?
Literally even 4chan has moderation.
Nobody, not even 4chan users, want an actually unmoderated space.
In fact, I wouldn't call the latter "moderation" at all, rather it's mods abusing their power to push political propaganda, but they do it through moderation in terms of action.
Giving an anonymous rando the power to censor my conversation is abhorrent. And it's absurd that most people are ok with that.
Again, which article, about what subject?
howunfortunate didn't answer, just deflected:
> Are there NYPost articles you feel people should be prevented from DMing? Or posting, for that matter?
qerghnui's reply was flagged to death:
> Why do you refuse to answer the question?
> The story you are referring to involved the New York Post or its affiliates breaking in to Hunter Biden's laptop (a felony) and publishing his personal correspondence, complete with unredacted phone numbers and email addresses. This violated Twitter's policies against doxxing and dissemination of hacked materials. Characterizing this as censorship is misleading; the story contained no newsworthy information and its publication violated longstanding Twitter policy. It's hard to imagine Twitter functioning without such a policy. I don't see any reason the New York Post should get away with violating it just because it claims to be a newspaper.
> The Wall Street Journal, a Murdoch rag like the Post and hardly known for its liberal bias, declined to publish this information, which is why it wound up in the disreputable Post instead. Respectable journalists have ethical standards. Act like thugs, get treated like thugs.
> P.S. Twitter is free to make whatever editorial decisions it pleases. Trying to make them publish something they don't want to publish is compelled speech. Compelling speech in the name of freedom of speech is hypocritical.
But your point is well taken, it's definitely more challenging and expensive than what's being done here.
In the last years many sites started to drop/block connections from the countries like China and Russia. It is sad to see how Internet is becoming more and more fragmented.
The glowing reviews would reflect quite the survivor bias.
Read the full thread on Hacker News →
Related stories
- The Verge · 0 points · 5 days ago
- Hacker News · 2 points · 7 days ago
- Show HN: Last Internet Connectiongithub.comHacker News · 1 points · 8 days ago
- Hacker News · 60 points · 13 days ago
- The Verge · 0 points · 7 days ago
- Ars Technica · 0 points · 1 day ago