=>/haze 👽 haze

My country is trying to combat fake news with censorship law again. It's frustating to see how broken the law is. Fortunatelly almost everyone and service providers are pushing back.

Just want to call for some awarensee.

gemini://gemini.clehaxze.tw/gemlog/2022/08-19-taiwans-digital-intermediary-law-is-more-than-stupid.gmi

2 years ago

Links

=>gemini://gemini.clehaxze.tw/gemlog/2022/08-19-taiwans-digital-intermediary-law-is-more-than-stupid.gmi gemini://gemini.clehaxze.tw/gemlog/2022/08-19-taiwans-digital-intermediary-law-is-more-than-stupid.gmi

Actions

=>/join 👋 Join Station

4 Replies

=>/krixano 👽 krixano

Yeah, there are some problems to the law that need to be fixed (namely, slight modifications of network requests by routers, etc.), but you are overexagerating things a lot. Not sure if it's because you want your article to be popular. You sound sorta like an anarchist that doesn't want any rules protecting people because governments can be flawed. The government creates laws to protect its citizens. The way you stop these "gullible humans" from doing stupid things is by having a good democratic government that is elected by *educated* people, as well as a government that is able to adapt and change for the better, not by having an anarchy. · 2 years ago

=>/krixano 👽 krixano

[Repost to fix]

> We can't build services that is so secure that providers can't know what's on the platform.

Hold up, that's not what the English says. It says you are *not liable* if you are not aware and are unable to detect the illegal content. That's the exact opposite, isn't it? Or are you saying this only really works with encrypted stuff and not distributed stuff that can't be encrypted? Fine, but that's like arguing apples don't have a use because they don't provide the nutrients of meat.

I'm confused by this article. Maybe the English is different from the Chinese, idk, but some things seem opposite from how you described them. · 2 years ago

=>/krixano 👽 krixano

And lastly, the part about *having* to store illegal content on networks like IPFS is not true. IPFS is not like Freenet, and afaik, the content itself is not stored in a hashtable. The hashtable is used to find *where* the content is. So, in order for there to be illegal content on your own computer, you would have to search out for it and download it to then become a peer of that content. ZeroNet works simlarly, just without the DHT. FreeNet *requires* you to distribute content without any say (which is why FreeNet is terrible, imo). · 2 years ago

=>/krixano 👽 krixano

I'm confused, are you complaining that the country is trying to get rid of illegal things like child pornography (which is not a victimless crime, btw), etc., or are you complaining that they included provisions saying when people don't have liability for this illegal content (which is actually extremely good, because *if done right*, it means you *can* use distributed services and not be liable for accidentally having illegal content distributed to your computer)?

You never actually specified what they considered illegal content, which is the most important thing to consider. I'm not an anarchist, so I believe some things actually should be illegal, lol. · 2 years ago