|
|
|
|
|
|
by aimazon
480 days ago
|
|
|
Some people are protesting against this law by threatening to shut down their websites or by deleting content. The founder of lfgss explicitly said they’re against the law on principle. I think historic content is very valuable which is why I am offended by this absurd response on hacker news where people are conflating the actions of a protest with the consequence of a law. If someone chooses to protest this law by deleting their website then more power to them but we must be honest about what it is: protest. People should be considerate about the consequence of the services they release onto the internet. We can debate the specifics of whether certain requirements are reasonable/fair/beneficial but it’s patently absurd to label choices these website owners are making as being caused by this law. The law has zero to do with historic content, there’s not a single risk to anyone who leaves a website online in read only mode as an archive. |
|
|
Your posts make sense if this is true, but I really don't think it's true.
Your argument that they won't be fussed to do anything about archived websites is very much not zero risk.