Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   /mastodon/gutocarvalho (gutocarvalho@bolha.us)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 20:22:27 JST /mastodon/gutocarvalho

   About the X block in Brazil.

   Brazilian supreme court were asking X to close/suspend/moderate:

   - accounts spreading fake news

   - accounts spreading hate speech

   - accounts spreading fascism/nazism ideology

   - accounts spreading racism

   - account spreading lbgtqia hate speech

   - accounts demanding to close the supreme court

   - accounts trying to create disarmony between federal powers, using fake news (executive branch, judiciary branch and legislative branch)

   - accounts asking to have another militar dictatorship government instead of democracy

   - accounts using free speech to attack judges, legislators, executives and governament branch leaders

   - accounts using free speech to haras other people

   And a lot, lot more.

   They tried several times to talk with them, but twitter refused to comply or respond.

   Supreme court is doing their job to secure the constitution and our Brazilian democracy.

   Twitter/X is a toxic non-moderated place right now, it's a risk for us and it's refusing to control their network, it's refusing to comply with brazilian laws and brazilian judiciarty court decisions.

   That's what's happening.

   That's the true.

   If you have question I'm here to help!

   • Embed this notice
     vetehinen@lethallava.land's status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 20:37:06 JST vetehinen

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho@bolha.us I read an Associated Press article that said some of the accounts that have vanished from Twitter "were prominent supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro". Do you know who these were, what kind of stuff were they posting and were they like politicians or what exactly does "prominent supporters" mean?

   • Embed this notice
     Jay (jaycalixto@mastodon.online)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 20:40:37 JST Jay

     in reply to

     • vetehinen

     @vetehinen @gutocarvalho they must mean some conspirancy theorists like Allan dos Santos. He's the brazilian Alex Jones

   • Embed this notice
     Toran Shaw - M7TOR (torspedia@mastodon.tjs.is)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:12:46 JST Toran Shaw - M7TOR

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho Musk only cares about the 'free speech' of the asleep right... as he showed during the recent UK election.

   • Embed this notice
     Metalheadbr (metalheadbr@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:15:25 JST Metalheadbr

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho achei que fosse um posto irônico teu....

   • Embed this notice
     RumbleArray (rumblearray@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:22:56 JST RumbleArray

     • vetehinen
     • Jay

     @gutocarvalho @jaycalixto @vetehinen Lol the same Interpol that Moraes was mad at and his friend in the justice system that were threatening to kidnap someone in the US territory? Classic banana dictator.

   • Embed this notice
     Metalheadbr (metalheadbr@mastodon.social)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:25:16 JST Metalheadbr

     @gutocarvalho Bom dia irmão, como vai? Não vejo como apoiar derrubarem uma rede com diversos outras funções com esse argumento.
     Já tem a multa imposta e a noticia que bloquearam as contas da Starlink pra cobrar... Pq tirar do ar?

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:33:26 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho
     

     If you have question I'm here to help!

     Ok. I'll bite.

     I understand that one of the orders that twitter refused to follow was to appoint a legal representative of twitter in Brazil.

     My questions are...

     • Is my understanding correct?
     • If so, what purpose was this legal officer to serve?
     • Was the judge intending to imprison that person if twitter continued to refuse the orders? If so, in what way is that not a human rights violation? Who did the judge think was stupid enough to agree to such an appointment?
   • Embed this notice
     Full Metal Accountant (ordrad@lor.sh)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:34:37 JST Full Metal Accountant

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho
     We need more countries to do the same.

   • Embed this notice
     Walter C. Smith (stiefel_fan@troet.cafe)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:43:25 JST Walter C. Smith

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho
     Just asking: How did you get your Brazilian Supreme Court to judge this in the way it did? 🤔

   • Embed this notice
     Dark Kassandra (darkassandra@c.im)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:44:13 JST Dark Kassandra

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho

     Next stop: ban all social networks, newspapers, dissident media and the the full reinstatement of the totalitarian regime.

   • Embed this notice
     Solomon (ojelabii@norden.social)'s status on Saturday, 31-Aug-2024 23:45:07 JST Solomon

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho One question: Will the government and the Brazilian people at all see this as a chance and join the fediverse, however Xitter might react? 🙃

   • Embed this notice
     Dark Kassandra (darkassandra@c.im)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:01:46 JST Dark Kassandra

     @gutocarvalho

     Internet is not a safe place, real life is not a safe place.

     Freedom is not safe either.

     Censorship put democracy in a dangerous place.

   • Embed this notice
     Emelia 👸🏻 (thisismissem@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:32:32 JST Emelia 👸🏻

     in reply to

     • eibhear

     @eibhear @gutocarvalho that is actually what is legally being signed up for when you are the director of a branch of a multinational company

     You're not just a mouth piece, you have a responsibility to ensure the company abides by local laws.

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:32:34 JST eibhear

     • eibhear

     @gutocarvalho I accept all of that -- no argument.

     But were the fines to be levied on the representative personally (i.e. "If twitter won't pay the fines, we'll make you personally liable for paying them")?

     /mastodon/gutocarvalho repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:35:57 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries CEOs, yes.

     Not appointed representatives for what the CEO does or fails to do.

     Quitting is hardly an option if you've already had a warrant for your arrest issued:

     Judge: "Jail that person!"
     Policeman: "Why?"
     Judge: "Because his boss broke the law"
     Staff member: "I've quit -- I don't work there any more"
     Boss: *continues breaking the law*
     Judge: "Dammit. Foiled again!"

   • Embed this notice
     Wilfried Klaebe (wonka@chaos.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:36:00 JST Wilfried Klaebe

     in reply to

     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @eibhear They could quit...

     It's quite a normal thing to imprison CEOs if their company does not pay fines.

     @gutocarvalho @jeffries

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:36:01 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries
     

     • Order the website to be blocked
     • Seize the company's assets
     • If you can get the legislature to agree, pass a law banning government departments from advertising on the website.
     • Shut down the company (i.e. de-register it).

     
     If you make it about the individual, then you have a serious human rights issue on your hands.

   • Embed this notice
     Wilfried Klaebe (wonka@chaos.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:36:03 JST Wilfried Klaebe

     in reply to

     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @jeffries Who else?

     How else would you envision enforcement of fines?

     @gutocarvalho @eibhear

   • Embed this notice
     SJ (jeffries@mas.to)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:36:04 JST SJ

     • eibhear

     @gutocarvalho @eibhear That doesn’t answer the question though… would the legal representative be personally at risk?

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:40:18 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     • Emelia 👸🏻
     • eibhear

     @thisismissem @gutocarvalho Yes. But, if the office is shut down, and the judge says: "open that office again so that I can arrest one of your employees because you won't comply with my orders", who would apply for that job?

     Imagine if Musk really really wanted to re-open an office in Brazil, who would he get to agree to be sent to jail? Who would have loved ones who would allow them to be sent to prison for Musk. Would Musk actually care if someone went to jail for him? Would he be any less of an asshole?

     The operating assumption where any of this is could work is that the office, the staff and the operations all take place within the jurisdiction. But, none of this is true for twitter and Brazil, so it's a bit odd to support the notion of employing someone to be arrested and jailed for Musk's decisions to operate a company (as shittily as he deems fit) in a completely different country.

   • Embed this notice
     Emelia 👸🏻 (thisismissem@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:41:58 JST Emelia 👸🏻

     in reply to

     • eibhear

     @eibhear @gutocarvalho offices and companies don't shut down over night, you do know that, right?

   • Embed this notice
     Snowshadow 🇨🇦 (snowshadow@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 00:43:48 JST Snowshadow 🇨🇦

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho
     Thank you for the explanation and your replies throughout the thread...very helpful and informative.

   • Embed this notice
     Video Processing Wiki (pythonlinks@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:16:04 JST Video Processing Wiki

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho

     Can the brazillian supreme court also shut down twitter in the US please?

   • Embed this notice
     RootWyrm 🇺🇦:progress: (rootwyrm@weird.autos)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:16:45 JST RootWyrm 🇺🇦:progress:

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho and don't forget, the entire reason the ban came about?

     Twitter refused to provide anyone the government could serve with legal process. Not dodging, they just closed their offices and disappeared.

     And when they picked an attorney (as is legal and their legal right) to serve as their agent in Brazil? That attorney *quit* rather than commit illegal acts.

     THAT'S why they got banned. They refused to comply with the most BASIC of requirements. NOT the lack of moderation.

   • Embed this notice
     Extra_Special_Carbon (extra_special_carbon@mastodon.world)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:22:55 JST Extra_Special_Carbon

     in reply to

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @eibhear @eibhear @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries I don’t think arbitrarily blocking websites is the way to go. First step should be a legal case publicly made. X has refused to participate in the public legal case. Now blocking the website becomes the only option.

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:22:56 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     • Extra_Special_Carbon
     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ
     @Extra_Special_Carbon @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries That next step could (and should) have been the first step: block the website and move on.
     /mastodon/gutocarvalho repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Extra_Special_Carbon (extra_special_carbon@mastodon.world)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:22:57 JST Extra_Special_Carbon

     in reply to

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @eibhear @eibhear @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries This is effectively what happened. With no representatives willing to represent the company, they move to the next step.

   • Embed this notice
     cy (cy@fedicy.us.to)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:23:17 JST cy

     in reply to
     If only my country protected its people like that!
     
   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:28:12 JST eibhear

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries The local representative is not the captain. At best, it's the first officer's mate.

     The operation of the ship is under Musk's control, and if there is someone to arrest, arrest him.

     If someone can't represent the company locally because the company won't comply with the law, then they resign. If the company has shut down the office and there's no one in the country to represent the company, then there's no one in the country to represent the company.

     there is no company in the world without someone responsable for the company, period.

     In this case, it's Elon Musk.

     I go back to some of my original questions to you:

     • Was twitter ordered to appoint a local officer by the judge?
     • If so, was that order made so that the judge would have someone local to personally punish?
     • If so, how is it reasonable to expect someone with no authority in twitter to agree to such an appointment?
     • Also, how do we think this isn't a human rights issue?
   • Embed this notice
     Michael Chavinda (mchav@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 02:56:23 JST Michael Chavinda

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho what about the rhetoric of blocking = authoritarianism? Whether or not it's true if people believe it, it may cause political instability.

   • Embed this notice
     Eugenia L (eugenialoli@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 03:11:56 JST Eugenia L

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho I'm personally against a nanny state. I want people to be able to express themselves, even if they're on the wrong side of history. I don't want illegal things going on, but opinions don't bother me. They can bark as much as they want, what's the harm if the rest of the population just doesn't listen to them, because they're their own individuals, that can't be swayed. That's why I find Twitter getting banned in Brazil, excessive.

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 03:13:15 JST eibhear

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries ... and there isn't a social media company anywhere in the world who will give content moderation authority to an officer in every country that requires it. Some expectations need to be adjusted for reality.

     I restate for clarity here: I have no problem with twitter being blocked. My problem is that we should never accept an innocent person (an accountant? a janitor?) being appointed the designated hostage when a country has a dispute with a company's HQ.

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 03:21:17 JST eibhear

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ
     @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries So, the order to appoint a local officer was not so that officer would be punished if Musk refused to obey the other orders?
   • Embed this notice
     elala@nrw.social (elala@nrw.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 03:28:07 JST elala@nrw.social

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho
     Hallo Brasilien 👋 🙂

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 03:42:53 JST eibhear

     • Wilfried Klaebe
     • eibhear
     • SJ

     @wonka @gutocarvalho @jeffries ... but that was my original question all those hours ago:

     Was the judge intending to imprison that person if twitter continued to refuse the orders?

     If the answer was always "no", we could have saved a great deal of energy.

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 06:44:18 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     • eibhear
     • Renato

     @gutocarvalho @renatofq Which leaves the judge with the course he took.

     But to expect that a local representative with no content moderation authority should go to jail for Musk's refusal to take down stuff is horrifying. To expect that a local representative would have content moderation authority is to fail to understand how social media companies work. This is something the judge should not have ordered.

   • Embed this notice
     Renato (renatofq@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 06:44:19 JST Renato

     in reply to

     • eibhear

     @eibhear @gutocarvalho

     I understand that. But I don't see how someone who cannot make decisions can be a legal representative for a company. Being legal representative is exactly about being legally responsible for it.

     The closing of the Twitter office in Brazil was precisely to avoid law enforcement, and Musk said that publicly.

   • Embed this notice
     Renato (renatofq@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 06:44:21 JST Renato

     in reply to

     • eibhear

     @eibhear @gutocarvalho

     I don't know if the legal representative would be arrested right away, but they would be under such risk for sure. But I don't see human's right violation there. I don't know what is your country but I would bet that you can be arrested if you refuse to comply with judiciary decisions.

     You seem to be arguing that this person would have not the power to comply with the decisions, but if that's the case, this person is not an actual representative, right?

   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 06:44:21 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     • eibhear
     • Renato

     @gutocarvalho @renatofq Content moderation in social media companies is centralized.

     The local representative would have nothing more than advisory powers, and we know Musk doesn't take advice.

   • Embed this notice
     /mastodon/gutocarvalho (gutocarvalho@bolha.us)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 06:47:56 JST /mastodon/gutocarvalho

     in reply to

     • M. Grégoire

     @mpjgregoire

     every private company in Brazil should and need to:

     - follow the laws
     - follow their gov agency regulations
     - answer to the judiciary if they demand something

     Twitter is not doing what is expected for a private company to do in those cases.

     It's not suprsing to see their product blocked.

     This will happen with any company doing the same, this behavior is unacceptable in Brazil.

   • Embed this notice
     M. Grégoire (mpjgregoire@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 06:47:57 JST M. Grégoire

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho Would you say in this matter that the Brazilian Supreme Court is acting as a neutral arbiter of the law, or has it decided to enforce certain policies for the good of Brazilians?

   • Embed this notice
     Renato (renatofq@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 07:00:16 JST Renato

     in reply to

     • eibhear

     @eibhear @gutocarvalho

     I see your point. But, legally, if someone took the job, they would be signing a paper saying that they take legal responsibility for Musk's decisions in Brazil, since they have no actual power. On the other hand the Judge could rule that the since this person have no actual power they cannot be the legal representative and cannot be indicted... but we are at the realm of speculation now.

   • Embed this notice
     M. Grégoire (mpjgregoire@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 07:59:50 JST M. Grégoire

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho I agree with those points: companies must follow the laws of the countries they operate in, and there should be a judicial system to arbitrate disputes about the law. But in the articles I've read [0] about the matter, it sounds like a struggle between X and Supreme Court Judge de Moraes. In my (essentially British) legal tradition, judges decide cases and rule their courts, but do not generally issue orders and never start investigations.

     [0] E.g., https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/brazil-lula-x-musk-1.7309481

   • Embed this notice
     AskPippa🇨🇦 (askpippa@c.im)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 08:01:50 JST AskPippa🇨🇦

     in reply to

     • Harp :wigglytuff:

     @wigglytuffitout @gutocarvalho maybe promote tips in Portuguese on how to the platform!

   • Embed this notice
     Harp :wigglytuff: (wigglytuffitout@elekk.xyz)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 08:01:51 JST Harp :wigglytuff:

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho thank you for this informative rundown of the situation!!

     honestly, i only have one question - and yes, this is me absolutely being the person in the audience after a talk who is asking a question mainly so the speaker can continue speaking LOL - what should the average person on the fediverse do to help make this place more welcoming for Brazilians? is there anything specific that we should be doing? even and especially if we only know english? is there any cultural trip-ups we should be on the lookout for, or is it just a good idea to generally extend grace and understanding as we welcome new friends?

     how can we here on the fediverse be the most helpful to brazilians coming to join us?

     (make your own joke here about how i am being very silly because my first thought was "oh, new neighbors! i should go bake a pie! wait this is online..." 😂 it can go next to the jokes about how i am silly for only knowing english, because i took latin as my second language in school and wouldn't you know it, there aren't very many ancient romans around here LOL)

   • Embed this notice
     M. Grégoire (mpjgregoire@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 20:42:00 JST M. Grégoire

     @gutocarvalho
     I suspect this is a fundamental difference in legal traditions. In the #WestminsterSystem of government, as in Canada, the basic role of judges is to react to breaches of the law and to assign punishments. It's unthinkable for a judge to take a proactive role of protecting or defending the system of government -- that's the job of parliament and the cabinet. We think that judges should be neutral referees to ensure laws are applied fairly.

     But it's different in Brazil, is it?

   • Embed this notice
     M. Grégoire (mpjgregoire@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 20:56:38 JST M. Grégoire

     @gutocarvalho Than-you for your explanations. There are real problems with misinformation on social networks and real questions about what sort of moderation is necessary, and of course X is currently run by someone who enjoys being a troll.

     But I confess that it feels inappropriate to me for a judge to be leading the fight, rather than a minister, the legislature or a senior civil servant.

   • Embed this notice
     /mastodon/gutocarvalho (gutocarvalho@bolha.us)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:00:59 JST /mastodon/gutocarvalho

     in reply to

     • Emelia 👸🏻
     • eibhear
     • Anarchic Teapot ⚧️

     @anarchic_teapot @eibhear @thisismissem

     I'm pretty sure that our court won't imprision a Brazilian representative, or force him or her to pay fines, they understand and known who is the real threat, they wont harm someone because of Musk personal war against Brazilian Gov.

     But they will prolly close the company in Brazil for good.

   • Embed this notice
     Anarchic Teapot ⚧️ (anarchic_teapot@lingo.lol)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:01:01 JST Anarchic Teapot ⚧️

     in reply to

     • Emelia 👸🏻
     • eibhear

     @eibhear @thisismissem @gutocarvalho
     1. Since Musk is the ultimate decision-maker, it is likely he would be the once receiving the sentence, unless it could be should that the country rep was complicit (cue King's Evidence, or whatever the local version is).
     2. Why should a country make a specific exception to its local agent laws just because Musk is an egotistical fascist cunt?

     /mastodon/gutocarvalho repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     eibhear (eibhear@social.gibiris.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:01:02 JST eibhear

     in reply to

     • Emelia 👸🏻
     • eibhear
     • Anarchic Teapot ⚧️

     @thisismissem @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho I think you're not reading what I'm saying. Let's punish twitter for failing to abide by the laws, and let's punish those who decide that twitter would not obey the law. This is 100% clear, and something I agree with.

     What I disagree with is the idea that a member of staff of twitter should be personally held liable -- up to the point of imprisonment -- for Musk's decisions, knowing as we all do that Musk listens to no one when he has a bee in his bonnet.

     /mastodon/gutocarvalho repeated this.
   • Embed this notice
     Anarchic Teapot ⚧️ (anarchic_teapot@lingo.lol)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:01:03 JST Anarchic Teapot ⚧️

     in reply to

     • Emelia 👸🏻
     • eibhear

     @eibhear @thisismissem @gutocarvalho
     "None of this is true for twitter and Brazil."

     Xitter *did* operate in Brazil, since it was made accessible to people in that country. This was a Xitter choice.
     Firing all the moderators was also a choice, as was letting in known far-right agitators, neo-Nazis and proponents of open hate speech, while muting/expelling pro-democracy, pro-tolerance, pro-diversity voices.

     If you can read a post in a country, the site that post is on operates in that country.

   • Embed this notice
     Emelia 👸🏻 (thisismissem@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:03:24 JST Emelia 👸🏻

     in reply to

     • eibhear
     • Anarchic Teapot ⚧️

     @eibhear @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho

     If you are the Managing Director of Twitter GmbH (Germany), and your parent company Twitter, LLC, doesn't allow you to follow german laws, and fines are levied against Twitter GmbH and neither Twitter GmbH nor Twitter LLC can or will pay those fines, then yes, there can be action taken against the Managing Director.

     That is, companies offer some liability protection in cases of bankruptcy and such, but not in refusal to follow the law.

   • Embed this notice
     M. Grégoire (mpjgregoire@cosocial.ca)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:16:25 JST M. Grégoire

     @gutocarvalho In what way is the Brazilian congress rotten? Feel free to send me a link, rather than a lengthy explanation.

   • Embed this notice
     Angelo (7pillz@fosstodon.org)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:16:49 JST Angelo

     in reply to

     • Emelia 👸🏻
     • eibhear
     • Anarchic Teapot ⚧️

     @thisismissem @eibhear @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho there’s no sense in defending musk. However, threatening enormous fines on ordinary citizens for simply using his platform or an even just a VPN strikes me as an extreme abuse of power.

   • Embed this notice
     Emelia 👸🏻 (thisismissem@hachyderm.io)'s status on Sunday, 01-Sep-2024 21:16:50 JST Emelia 👸🏻

     in reply to

     • eibhear
     • Anarchic Teapot ⚧️

     @eibhear @anarchic_teapot @gutocarvalho

     Your issue isn't with Brazil, STF, or anything, it's with Musk throwing someone who agreed to work with him in good faith under the bus.

     Musk knew refusing to comply would mean legal liability for that person, and chose not to comply.

   • Embed this notice
     Jérémy Pagès (jpages@mastodon.online)'s status on Monday, 02-Sep-2024 15:54:46 JST Jérémy Pagès

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho Net Neutrality is an absolute rule, and threats over VPN usage are absolutely unacceptable.

     Moraes is a dangerous tyrant, as demonstrated by Glenn Greenwald and others.

   • Embed this notice
     Jérémy Pagès (jpages@mastodon.online)'s status on Monday, 02-Sep-2024 16:02:42 JST Jérémy Pagès

     @gutocarvalho The intention is enough for me. This guy wanted to strongly fine people for VPN usage, like in Belarus or Saudi Arabia.

   • Embed this notice
     Paul (pf3@mastodon.social)'s status on Thursday, 05-Sep-2024 19:14:23 JST Paul

     in reply to

     @gutocarvalho " accounts demanding to close the supreme court"

     Is the Supreme Court of Brazil sacred or something?

   • Embed this notice
     Alexandre Oliva (lxo@gnusocial.net)'s status on Friday, 06-Sep-2024 13:43:05 JST Alexandre Oliva

     in reply to

     • Paul
     what guto said. it's really simple:
     overthrowing the democratically established powers through undemocratic means is against the law.
     inciting crimes is also against the law.