Canadian Sikh Facebook users receive notifications that their posts are being taken down because they’re in violation of Indian law

46 points
*

So they received a take down request from the Indian government, mistook the users for being in India, followed the law that they’re required to follow in India, and when it was brought to their attention that those users were actually based in Canada they went back and allowed the posts. This doesn’t seem as malicious as people are making it out to be, they should probably work on their geo-blocking, but with 3 billion users in 150+ countries with their own local laws it’s probably safer to be aggressive when it comes to removing content when requested.

permalink
report
reply
3 points

‘Guilty until proven innocent.’

Glad corporations get the power to make these decisions.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Well they don’t, hence why they’re taking down posts as required by the countries they operate in and willing to accept a noticable false positive rate to do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

What are you talking about?

What requirement is there in India for Facebook to ban Canadians?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I think this comes under the ‘Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity’ Hanlons razor

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

I think less of anyone who brings that up.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I think less of anyone who says that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
reply
39 points

If anyone needs another example of why centralized social media is dangerous, here’s one.

permalink
report
reply
-36 points

And what would you call the child porn that keeps popping up here?

You people are absurd and just throwing spaghetti at the wall.

This is clearly an admin mistake over at Facebook but you people want Facebook to fail so badly you run with the most inconsequential dumb shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
-22 points

By paying teams of people, which fediverse has an aversion too.

I also like how you do confidently declare it’s easily dealt with engine the instances are currently fighting and blocking child porn attacks. Like it’s going on right now in plain sight and you are calling it mission accomplished 🤣.

That’s some Bush on an aircraft carrier levels of reality wrangling.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Apparently “CSAM”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Woah dude. Where did that come from. One thing being worthy of criticism doesn’t mean other things aren’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Part of freedom is that some people will abuse it.

I hope you’re not suggesting we should give up freedoms so those abusing it can’t.

Just go after the abusers, which instance admins do.

If you’re trying to suggest a solution to stop all sharing of CP on the internet without restricting everyone else, I’d love to hear what you come up with.

waits patiently

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

No, you should employee the team and put in place the procedures for handling it according to the law. Liked literally everyone out there doing social media.

permalink
report
parent
reply
90 points

sound like a great reason to stop using Facebook

permalink
report
reply
1 point
*

Wow, I didn’t think “Facebook sucks” would be such a controversial statement on a place like Lemmy or kbin

permalink
report
parent
reply
-37 points

Yeah a random minute wage Indian worker applied policy wrong. Absolutely fantastic reason to not use the platform!!! 🤦‍♂️

This type of shit is exactly why nobody listens to privacy advocates. People see this reaction and just laugh.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

What does this persons comment have to do with being a privacy advocate? Maybe they’re just vehemently anti monopoly and hate Facebook for that.

Judging by the downvotes everyone saw your reaction and laughed instead of the one you’re replying to…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-35 points

I wonder if people would have the same reaction if the person in question was a known Islamic Terrorist. If there were Facebook groups praising the legacy of Osama Bin Laden, would Meta be then justified to carry out similar censorship?

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

This guy isn’t a terrorist, or at least is not demonstrably so.

His only crime is wanting to create a place for Sikhs. Maybe he uses violence but I don’t see that in a Google search.

Besides which, if india had credible evidence he was a terrorist…. Chances are solid that he’d have been extradited long before now. It sounds like he wasn’t actually a citizen, but a refugee

permalink
report
parent
reply
-18 points

This guy is a wanted terrorist in India. I agree he wanted a place for Sikhs but on what cost? He wanted to split the nation and it is unacceptable. He created so much violence inside the nation for that, many people were killed. It is like those proud boys want to split America and make Texas a country.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
66 points

Toss it on the pile.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

Stop with the censorship.

Stop using censored platforms.

permalink
report
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 15K

    Monthly active users

  • 18K

    Posts

  • 480K

    Comments