[rektide]

> Justice Minister Flavio Dino said Google had two hours after being notified to change a link on its search engine that connects to material that argues against the regulation bill and urges readers to call their representatives to vote against it.

Linking to material that doesn't support an awful bullshit law. Going to be fined $200k/hr if they didn't take down the link.

Google can't even advocate for themaelves, according to Brazil. Illiberal, un-Democratic, & thin skinned.

See also Brazil ordering a bunnch of CEOs to testify. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35792246

Letting each country regulate the internet as they see fit is not sustainable. The information superhighway is being demolished by the egocentric greed of nations.

[ano-ther]

> Letting each country regulate the internet as they see fit is not sustainable.

That only works if you live in the country which sets the rules. Sure, it’s a hassle, but every other industry deals with local regulation when doing international business. Trade agreements and trade blocs like the EU help somewhat in harmonizing legislation.

> The information superhighway is being demolished by the egocentric greed of nations.

Nah. Being able to choose your own laws is kind of the definition of statehood. If you want to business, adapt. Even within in the US, there is often different regulation across the states.

[rektide]

Brazil isn't regulating their state, they're regulating the internet.

Your tough-love rejoinder here feels wildly inappropriate for a place with "Hacker" in the name. This place should cherish some freedom & some ability to let different people & different places try different things. Instead we're all being tied down by any state anywhere that wants to make any rule.

How does this play keep playing out? What happens when rules are in conflict? What happens when Brazil decides one thing has to be said and another state decides that is fake news & can't be said. This post is about Brazil telling Google they can't advocate for their position at all, but what they're advocating against is compelled speech. What if that compelled speech directly conflict with another states laws?

I don't see any long term play where any of this ever gets better. The legal climate will only get worse and worse here. There's too many states, and there's next to no hope for making speech possible again. The legal condition for ability to think and speak freely has gotten incredibly murky in the past couple of years, and this tough love proposal to just deal with it, to respect everyone, obey all the laws: it has no quarter in my heart. It should be obviously terrible & awful a situation.

[vineyardmike]

> Google can't even advocate for themaelves, according to Brazil. Illiberal, un-Democratic, & thin skinned.

Inflammatory but agreeable.

> Letting each country regulate the internet as they see fit is not sustainable.

Each country can regulate any other aspect of their society. Like every other industry is. Welcome to the future, it looks like the past.

Realistically, nations will regulate. You’ll see companies run geo-located tech stacks, and make geo-specific products. Like every other industry.

Profits will be lower per user, since costs will be higher to reach the long-tail customers. Like every other industry.

[rektide]

> Each country can regulate any other aspect of their society. Like every other industry is. Welcome to the future, it looks like the past.

Brazil is granting themselves right to regulate the entire internet, which is more than their society.

[amadeuspagel]

> Letting each country regulate the internet as they see fit is not sustainable.

There was a WSJ oped on this issue recently, demanding that "congress should clarify that courts and regulators may not enforce any law or judgment against constitutionally protected speech."[1]

[1]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-keep-online-speech-free-...

[beerpls]

Would you rather the internet just keep decaying as major corps like google do everything they can to make search impossible unless it’s through a funnel where you end up paying one of their advertisers?

At this point nations screwing with google is just cathartic. They deserve zero sympathy.

[matheusmoreira]

I hate Google and its surveillance capitalism abuses as much as anyone here but they're not in the wrong here. Brazilian politicians and supreme court are threatening hourly fines if they don't remove what's essentially their own opinions on their own sites. LITERAL censorship.

This shit is completely out of control. I'm actually afraid and worried about my own safety. It's gotten to the point my own family -- who lived through the military dictatorship -- advised me to stop posting online for fear it may lead to my arrest. How fucked up is that?

[lobocinza]

I rather deal with Google than deal with armed goons backed by laws.

[dontlaugh]

Tell me you’re American without telling me you’re American.

[cvalka]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_SOPA_and_PIPA