Starlink is refusing to comply with Brazil's X ban (Update: Starlink will comply) - eviltoast
  • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    3 months ago

    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
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      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
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        3 months ago

        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
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          3 months ago

          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.