alt Hacker NewsYour context window is too small, you ignored all my input.
Besides, I hope this isn't yet a minority stance on here, a democratic state is hopefully more powerful than a company, yes, indeed. The mode of a state captured by the biggest enterprises isn't really something we should run to, right?
What mr. twitter account could have done is vent all his outrage, without normalizing all that other shit. Then he has media attention and most likely some public debate, unlike many other sufferers whose life are less interesting. And you know what? The people could have found that he had a point! He could have triggered some further debate in parliament, some adjustment from the law makers. You know, the usual, normal way of respecting the rule of law, especially when you heavily disagree with one aspect of it.
Because that is what is meant by participating in what we call democracy.
I am sorry for my lack of sugar coating, but man do I get upset by the normalization of anti-democratic thinking here.
Sports organizations in most countries have widespread latitude that are afforded to few other companies.
Whether this is crony capitalism or simply protecting one of the largest domestic industries, Italy will likely side with the industry that is responsible for 0.5% of their GDP over some foreigner who can easily be justified as trying to spread piracy. It’s hard to honestly believe that this is some democracy vs corporation war. At best it is two corporation groups (a powerful Italian sports and broadcasting one and a weak US tech one) attempting to recruit state power (respectively the powerful Italy vs. the much more powerful US) to their cause.
European nations also have a long and storied history of communications control and they haven’t really changed very much on that front (as recent Chat Control attempts have shown). It will be unsurprising that they exercise their muscle to practice before they do so for a significant event.
Naturally, any proponent of such schemes will gladly hope that organizations affected use ineffective means. In general, I prefer that my opponents also don’t harm me and instead fail to achieve their goals. It’s pretty natural to ask others to play by some rules while simultaneously choosing to add escape hatches for oneself.
As an example from a different sphere: Russia, having invaded Crimea, preferred a peaceful end to the war and that Ukraine respond not militarily but through ineffective diplomatic overtures to other countries.
One always wants others to follow norms while being free to not do so oneself. That usually helps one win. Wrapping such isolated demands for rigor in polemic is a sufficiently standard strategy that it’s identifiable as such.