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?

X is challenging the legal order in court btw:

(x.com)

Just like they have done and are doing in basically every country that makes legal demands like this.

Edit: the dogpiling in here is insane.

I post a link to a tweet where X spell out that they were FORCED by the Turkish government to ban the account, and that they are challenging the order in court because they don’t believe in this violation of free speech……and I get downvoted?

Ekrem is Kemalist, which is very similar to a literal Nazi, but in the current world I'll even agree he's kinda better than many other variants.

I can't say I'm surprised...

ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

Page Unavailable

ABC News (abcnews.go.com)

X restricted Imamoglu’s account in Turkey complying with a legal request by Turkish authorities who cited national security and public order concerns.

X are also challenging the legal order in court: https://x.com/GlobalAffairs/status/1920426409358455081

You've called the good guys here the nazis and let the actual authoritarians off the hook scott-free.

Expecting Bluesky to do the same in a short while.

Why?

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.

His gesture is as much of a "Nazi salute" as Elon Musks. They're either both Nazi salutes, or neither are. No other option.

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

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.

I can't say I'm surprised...

ABC News – Breaking News, Latest News and Videos

Page Unavailable

ABC News (abcnews.go.com)

X restricted Imamoglu’s account in Turkey complying with a legal request by Turkish authorities who cited national security and public order concerns.

(x.com)

"full of shit" = "standing up for free speech against governments that are trying to censor political opponents" ?

He would get blocked there because BlueSky will comply with legal requests as well, because if they don't they will face criminal charges and/or massive fines. BlueSky, being a platform that loves censorship, would not challenge the legal order in court like X are either.

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

edit: BlueSky have already blocked his account lol

Sedat Kapanoğlu (@ssg.dev)

so apparently, bluesky has started honoring government takedown requests from turkish government. i wonder what the nature of measures taken are. do the accounts or the content get taken down or do they get geofenced, @jay.bsky.team ? [contains quote post or other embedded content]

Bluesky Social (bsky.app)

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.

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.

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.