- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- technology@beehaw.org
- cross-posted to:
- world@lemmy.world
- technology@beehaw.org
You must log in or register to comment.
US ex-pats won’t like this. Vietnam is a favorite country to emigrate to. You can’t apply for permanent residency but there’s almost no limit on temporary visas. I think they just require you to leave the country for like 90 days every two or three years.
Wait, how is it draconian to stand by your words? This will make it hard to use botnets to kickstart colour revolutions, makes people accountable for their words and sure as shit won’t stop dissidents from complaining. We’ve had whistle-blowers and dissidents before social media. How is this law bad? Now companies like google and Facebook can’t inflate their numbers? Oh no, the horror.
Forcing people to identify themselves on major social platforms then arresting people for any speech critical of the government is what makes it a bad law.
But the government can already accomplish the latter without needing the former. It does make their job much easier.
Not true. In vietnam you can create anonymous accounts and still will be able to after this. This law is another step in tightening the restrictions towards the goal of no anonymity.
Anonymity should only be available to those smart enough to be so. Already too many people share what comes to their mind without consequence and forethought causing a mass increase in far right sentiment and violence. Hate crimes are at an all time high. This is a good law, in fact, every country should have it.
It’s a bad law and no country should have it. I’m against age verification as well, since it’s a step toward forced identification. My area passed age verification, which means I need to set up my network with a VPN so my family is safe from corporations (and thus government) from having even more information about us.
Anonymity is critical for a free society. And yeah, freedom has its own costs, such as hate crime, which I’m well aware of since my SO and therefore kids are minorities. But freedom to publicly criticize your government would be significantly curtailed without anonymity.
You’re saying that almost as if you tried to imply that colour revolutions are a bad thing.
Colour revolutions are bad by definition. The CIA is always bad, everything they have always done has been bad.
They are
When half your family is amongst the inevitable dead of said revolution, would you please repeat what you just said?
Well, what did you expect from a communist dictatorship?
It has a government? Then it’s not communist
Communist is an adjective, and it’s right there in their name:
Under the constitution, the Communist Party of Vietnam (CPV) asserts their role in all branches of the country’s politics and society.
While the country may not be strictly communist, the adjective is absolutely appropriate to describe its ruling party, which is the only party allowed and therefore it’s valid to refer to the entire government by that adjective.
You’re just being obtuse…
Oh yes, the capitalist country with the capitalist flag all over and a capitalist party, wait… That aint right…
Thx for the easy copy/paste @MTK@lemmy.world
Its a communist party trying to achieve communism while being in socialism
Is this satire?
If not, who would you say is the dictator of Vietnam?
If only the US and EU had this to suppress the “Far Right”. Democracy would be protected.
All this would do is turn the far right into a slightly more hidden far right.
No, it would make it more explicitly far right. It turns out being able to identify users on also platforms is useful to silence dissent.
That’s not how it works.
The US is very far right though. In the US something like this will be used to punish women seeking abortions.
Countries don’t do this to oppress their people, they do it because they’ve seen the Internet used to influence right wing extremists by foreign actors.
“If anyone is going to oppress our people it’s us”
Umm, wtf?
By definition, this law is authoritarian in its very nature. Far right wing extremism at it’s finest. But only to protect the people from…far right wing extremism???
Umm, sure, if you say so dude. Or, wait a minute, no, you’re completely off your rocker. Like, what the fuck…
Don’t even try to reason with people here that governments should be responsible for blocking harmful agents to affect the population. Government control and communism are bad words here, it’s obviously much better to be free to spread misinformation and foreign propaganda, and if you can’t have such freedom, you’re obviously being oppressed by the government. I wish my ““free”” country had done the same ~10 years ago when social media truly became mainstream, and maybe we wouldn’t have suffered a coup d’état that was clearly in the best interests of other nations.
Do you think the government is only removing misinformation and foreign propaganda? I’m in Vietnam right now, the government plays propaganda on a loudspeaker daily. The history they portray over here is verifiably false and intentionally misleading.
It’s almost like having a single party in control of everything is a bad idea…
Yes because as we all know there’s a shortage of right wing dipshits who don’t hide their identities.
Sure, chief. Whatever you have to tell yourself.
