• 0x0@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    31
    ·
    17 days ago

    Again, you’d be shooting the messenger.

    Also, the double-standards are stupid: countries in the Middle East block social media - bad; Brazil blocks X - good. Elon’s an asshole but that’s not the way you do things. If X is in the wrong what the government should to is apply a hefty fine. Or sue them. Or both.

    • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      17 days ago

      Elon just wouldn’t pay and sueing generally ends in a fine which Elon would again not pay. Eventually a blanket ban is the only effective solution if a company refuses to get along.

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        21
        ·
        17 days ago

        That’s your excuse? Weak. And very poor policy… He won’t do it let’s skip due process and go full censorship 'cos Musk’s easy to hate. Weird legal system that is…

        First fine. Heavily. Only after the company fails to pay do you proceed to stronger deterrents.

        By all means follow the other sheep.

        • towerful@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/explained-why-brazil-s-supreme-court-banned-elon-musk-s-x-platform-124090200229_1.html

          Additionally, the judge froze the financial assets of Starlink, Musk’s satellite internet company, to cover unpaid fines amounting to 18.5 million reais ($3.28 million) imposed on X for non-compliance.

          So, exactly what Brazil has done?

          Edit:
          Some more detail on the daily fines imposed, and total fines due.
          https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/aug/30/elon-musk-x-could-face-ban-in-brazil-after-failure-to-appoint-legal-representative

          • Monomate
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            17 days ago

            This freeze of Starlink’s financial assets is so absurd, that even Brazilian Speaker of the House (a big son of a bitch himself) criticized it. He made a comparison to another recent national scandal about retailer Americanas defrauding it’s accounting to hide the fact it is in deep debt. Its owner fled to Europe to avoid persecution. Under the same argument, they’d be authorized to freeze Ambev’s (beverage company which is partially owned by Americanas’ owner) assets to cover for Americanas’ debt.

            The insane judge that ordered the asset freeze is so blinded by his vendetta against Elon Musk that he does dumb shit like this, which is putting a big stain on Brazil credibility to foreign investors. If a single insane judge can do this on his whim, who would want to invest in Brazil?

            • emax_gomax@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              17 days ago

              The key point here was 18.5 million in unpaid fines. If you wanna move the goal posts to liquidating related assets that’s fine, but you said due process has been skipped when very clearly due process was followed, musk ignored it and pretended to be above the law like he normally does, musk got his company banned.

              • Monomate
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                17 days ago

                There are legal ways for the judicial system to recover assets. Going after other companies, even if Musk has 40% stake on Starlink, is madness. One thing does not justify the other.

            • towerful@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              17 days ago

              Sure, but the fines have gone unpaid.
              The private owner of the private company X has enough money to cover the fines.
              Brazil is now seizing assets to try and recover the amount due.

              X isn’t declaring bankruptcy. X is flaunting legal rulings and dodging fines.
              If that scares away “investors” that are going to skirt or flaunt laws, rulings and legality then it seems like a decent result for Brazil.

              • Monomate
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                17 days ago

                No minimally serious country destroys the legal separation between different companies so brazenly. If it is for such a thing to happen, it’s only on exceptional circunstances, and only after the a full lawsuit concludes its natural course, giving all affected parties the right to offer their defenses. Anything far from these basic civilizational principles is no more than a whim from a dictator’s inflated ego.

                • towerful@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  16 days ago

                  This is what “eat the rich” and “if a punishment is a fee, it’s an operating cost” mean. You get your company banned and personal assets seized. It’s delicious.

                  Anyway, I’m not going to take your outrage seriously.
                  First it was hell bent that no legal process had been done, which took me all of 2 seconds of googling to disprove.
                  Now it’s that only uncivilised places would dare seize personal assets. And somehow still that no legal process has been done.

                  This has been going on for months, with musk acting like the man-baby he is.
                  https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brazil-elon-musk-x-twitter-free-speech-disinformation-obstruction/

    • JaggedRobotPubes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      17 days ago

      You’re talking about this like blocking the free flow of ground-up information is the same as blocking cunty authoritarian propaganda.

    • Ilandar@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      17 days ago

      the double-standards are stupid: countries in the Middle East block social media - bad; Brazil blocks X - good.

      That sounds like a massive oversimplification. Why are these countries blocking or banning social media platforms? How do their citizens feel about the decisions? Those are the things that should be focused on, not boring American culture war shit.

    • Hanrahan@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      17 days ago

      If the Government issues an order to remove a post that says “Don’t Get vaccinated and pray instead” vs “you called our President/King/Autocrat a cnut, so your post should be removed and your ID passed on so you can be prosecuted” are both having the govenrmt intervene, most sane people in democracies would be ok with the former but not the latter.

      As an Australian I was NOT ok with the Australian governments esafety commissioner trying their stunt with Twitter. I find it doubly amazing the continued use of the service by any of our politicians , fcuk them. Set up a Mastodon instance and use that ffs.

      https://variety.com/2024/digital/news/australian-court-elon-musk-x-freedom-of-speech-row-1236000561/

    • moitoi@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      16 days ago

      Twitter isn’t the messenger. This is what they want you to think. Twitter is a private, for profit company. It’s not a public place lake the street. They have to be proactive and follow the local laws. They are responsible for what you can read on it as well as the people posting.

      This is a huge difference with the street. The street is public not private, you’re responsible for what you say.

      Internet is not the wilde west. Companies have to follow and adapt to the local law or just not operating there.