Elegant answer, thank you
However, making companies pay (seizing the ship and goods until arrangements are found) is a different story. It happens so rarely that I can’t predict the outcome.
Well put. I’d wonder if the fact that a boat plus good costs a few 100k might be related to it’s irrelevancy.
Did you read the article that I refered too?
A proven government related terrorist got exchanged for a bimbo falsy imprisoned NGO worker.
This was in Belgium. Maybe a more baltic attitude will have a more reasonable response.
I’d hope, but not count on, that being so ;)
This is EU, there’ll be no consequences.
They’ll be exchanged for some naive NGO worker, falsely imprisoned, and get off scot free, both the persons doing the mission, and the planners (example (1)).
I’m sorry your anger doesn’t allow you to see the connection between the technical implementation, and philosophy of www, and your own answer to OPs question.
I think it’s dangerous to be unscathed by governments deciding which publishers publish “truth”, and which don’t.
To not care if the “law” applies to 100% of the population, or only 95%. Some more equal under the law than others.
I bring up 3, because the idea behind www was to counteract the points above.
Imagine the same techniques used by a government you do not agree with. It’s very scary, no?
Some thoughts:
(1) networks don’t necessarily run according to judicial borders.
(2) you also have to penalize the use of rerouting tools, which Brazil seems to have done.
(3) it became incorrect to refer to it as “world wide web”
More than that. The Brazil government made it illegal for it’s citizens to access the site, as well as the use of a VPN. (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blocking_of_Twitter_in_Brazil, chapter ‘Blocking’).
I think it’s a swell idea, banning your citizens from reading information you decide is wrong.
Apparently, it works by fining users that visit the site. See chapter “Blocking”.
How nice, a government that puts criminal penalties on it’s citizens reading the (according to them) wrong things. Banning technologies like VPNs.
It’s short sighted indeed.
In practice, we could sever the connection between EU internet and the rest of the internet.
Maybe whitelist a set of ideas that are allowed to pass through the great eu firewall.
Ask him what he would like to know about you.
Please forward this information to the pakistani religious body. They might’ve received a faulty copy of the document.
If jaweh wanted VPN, then why isn’t it in the koran?
Maybe fairphone is up your alley?
Xubuntu. Convenience of ubuntu, less cluttered UI.
Thinking of the top if my head. I haven’t tested this.
wg show lists connect peers, amongst other things. You can pipe that to grep to filter for just the peers.
With watch, you can periodically do the commands mentioned above, and execute another command on change.
With ntfy.sh you can easily get notifications on android or iphone.
The whole thing would look like.
watch --chgexit "wg show | grep peer" && curl -d "Someone (dis)connected!" ntfy.sh/mysecrettopic
Good luck to them! A barrier to overcome
They’re dated no? Infowars and the onion?
Why did anyone join it in the first place?