So you think that instead of complying while fighting the legal order and being able to tell users that what is happening, you think that they should pull the entire site from the country?

They aren’t “choosing to bow to threats by a dictator” - they are following the law, and fighting the legal order through the courts.

Come on mate lol. They’re doing the absolute most user and free speech friendly thing they can possibly do given the situation.

Question - what would you have done in this situation if you owned and ran X?

I would never stoop so low as to exploit the labor of others

Oh thats funny because they refused to take down the Sydney stabbing videos, despite being told to for months. They gave us a half arsed geoblock for Australia while still allowing the offending material to circulate.

And Musk will routinely attack free speech, he does it all the time on X to users e.g. plane tracker guy

Edit: Ah you're a rightist troll trying to pretend Musk isnt a Nazi, I see.

Ah yes, the guy who had no ill will towards anybody, tried to unify people to the best of his ability, and provided cheaper food for the poor... is a Nazi!

Holy shit, the sheer stupidity needed to come up with such a take!

Expecting Bluesky to do the same in a short while.

Why?

I know they would comply just as well, as I stated in another comment, because they are a private platform, but actually in this case the presence on Bluesky of the Imamoglu account in perfect condition with 129K followers proves that something else must be the case here.

Also, X didn't give a shit about complying in Brazil.

Nah, Nazi platform does nazi stuff, it's that simple.

You can come down the mirror now.

There needs to be some sort of unblockable self-hosted broadcast system where users can spin up their own cloud hosted instance by entering a username and password and choosing one of hundreds of providers for a small fee, or self hosted instance as quickly and easily as installing a single app on an android phone. These with act just like websites, but with a common protocol and API so they can communicate with each other and with clients with no specific add-on. Then, Turkey or whoever could block Turkish ISPs from fulfilling that request, but anyone else could still access the instance in their client as long as their own instance doesn't block it.

Hostable on a phone, a windows PC, Linux PC, self-hosted VM, cloud rented VM, whatever. And easily portable from one place to another.

Sure, uptime and reliability would suffer, EG when PC is turned off, but that's acceptable to gain resilience against ISP, central services like google and Facebook and twitter, and government interference.

I have designed a system to do this, using very reliable existing protocols and programming frameworks, I just don't have the time or money to invest to make it happen.

Hah, I designed one as well!

I think the flow of information has to be fundamentally different.

In mine, people only receive data directly from people they know and trust in real life. This makes scaling easy, and makes it impossible for centralized entities to broadcast propaganda to everyone at once.

I described it at freetheinter.net if you're interested

No, that is not how words or logic or anything really works. But it is unsurprising that a fascist like you wouldn't know that, considering you don't really care about words.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, isn't that basically what signal does?

Perhaps you have not been following the news. Elon Musk owns Twitter these days.

Bluesky blocked his account in turkey btw, just like X did. Bluesky have made no mention of challenging the legal request in court like X have though.

Iirc the Brazil situation was the first time anything like this had happened since Musk bought Twitter. They definitely didn’t handle it correctly, but they’ve clearly learned since then. Now they comply with legal requests and challenge them through the courts. Would you prefer they just folded every time and didn’t challenge, like all the others? Like Bluesky?

Good work on calling me a nazi though! I did nazi that coming!!

Well, that is one way to get off the Nazi platform.

1. How is censoring a politician "standing up for free speech"?
2. "full of shit" = not a "free speech absolutist". "free speech absolutist" implies that you will not censor any speech no matter what.

if they don't they will face criminal charges

The Turkish government does not have the authority to enforce criminal charges on an American person/company.

Even fediverse instance owners would be forced to block his accounts under threat of fines and/or prosecution.

Only if the instance owners/servers were in Turkey.

Criminal charges was probably the wrong word, but that’s being pedantic. The company operates in Turkey and allows Turkish people to use the product, so they have to follow Turkish laws. The Turkish government can file legal charges against them for failure to comply. Same with any fediverse instance owners - they would either have to block their instance from all Turkish users, or comply.

You don’t seem to understand how the legal system and governments work.

They issued a legal request to censor his account in Turkey. Failure to do so would result in severe consequences for X, such as having to take X offline for all of Turkey.

X complied with the law and are challenging the censorship request in court, the only place that has the power to overrule the government.

that’s being pedantic

It's not. At all.

they would either have to block their instance from all Turkish users, or comply.

No, they wouldn't. Once again, Turkey has no authority over people and servers not located in their jurisdiction.

You don’t seem to understand how the legal system and governments work.

I am not a lawyer but I do understand how jurisdictions work. Elon is not in theirs.

Failure to do so would result in severe consequences for X, such as having to take X offline for all of Turkey.

If he were a "free speech absolutist" as he claims, he would let them.

You didn't answer my question.

The Turkish government has legal authority over companies that are serving their citizens.

Why do you think the GDPR laws were such a big deal even outside of the UK?