News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:UK ditches ban on 'legal but harmful' online content in f... by ellrob88 on Tuesday November 29, 2022 @07:17PM (#33795240)
No, I don't think the government needs to be directly involved for it to be considered bad. The example you describe sounds very bad to me.

But my comment was questioning OP's suggestion that the incident was tied to authoritarianism.

Re:UK ditches ban on 'legal but harmful' online content in f... by dylan604 on Tuesday November 29, 2022 @07:28PM (#33795321)
You do realize I wasn't describing a hypothetical situation, right?
Re:UK ditches ban on 'legal but harmful' online content in f... by ellrob88 on Tuesday November 29, 2022 @10:16PM (#33796584)
I kinda assumed you were referring to Trump (?)

But my point all along has been that "youtube personality getting house firebombed" != "ridiculous authoritarianism in Australia".

If you are arguing against this point, I may need you to explain further.

Re:UK ditches ban on 'legal but harmful' online content in f... by dylan604 on Tuesday November 29, 2022 @11:24PM (#33797004)
I don't follow Australian politics closely, so what has/hasn't been said by its leaders is unknown to me. I was merely suggesting that if a leader has insinuated that something like that wouldn't be a bad idea, then some might say you now how a gov't official involved.