cross-posted from: https://programming.dev/post/36863320

Comments

Viber, WeTalk, TikTok, Nimbuzz, and Poppo Live are already registered.

Similarly, Telegram and Global Diary are in the process of registration.

Social media platforms to be blocked:

  1. Facebook
  2. Facebook Messenger
  3. Instagram
  4. YouTube
  5. WhatsApp
  6. X (formerly Twitter)
  7. LinkedIn
  8. Snapchat
  9. Reddit
  10. Discord
  11. Pinterest
  12. Signal
  13. Threads
  14. WeChat
  15. Quora
  16. Tumblr
  17. Clubhouse
  18. Mastodon
  19. Rumble
  20. MeWe
  21. VK
  22. Line
  23. IMO
  24. Zalo
  25. Soul
  26. Hamro Patro
Other Sources
  • abbiistabbii@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    23 hours ago

    OK so three things:

    1. How are they going to ban Mastodon. Like they cannot ban every mastodon instance.
    2. From what I know about people in regimes like this: VPN usage is basically normal because of things like this. I live in the UK and I’m using a VPN.
    3. Hamro Patro, if you don’t know, is the Nepali “everything” app. It’s officially a calendar app, but it also does News, Horoscopes (something that’s important to Nepalis I guess), Exchange Rates, Radio and Podcasts. It is one of the most popular apps in the country and the most popular Nepali developed app period. This is like if the US banned the CNN app or if the British Government banned the Sky News app.
    • tankfox@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      17 hours ago

      Modern laws rarely if ever have anything to do with what they claim to be changing. Just figure out where the graft is flowing and that’s your answer. There’s no graft to be had with mastodon because nobody is making any money there so at first it’s simply ignored unless it annoys someone in Nepal’s government. If an instance suddenly started getting popular and making money in Nepal then it gets on their radar and they have to start paying bribes to continue operating just like the big guys, and there will be no room at all for a ‘medium guy’ who makes a little profit but not enough to comply with the requirements of corruption.

  • Stubb@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    24 hours ago

    They only implement DNS blocking so you have to change your DNS and everything will work again — this is also the case with their ban on porn sites. It’s just an inconvenience to the citizens, all because they aren’t competent enough to manage “criminal activites”.

    • Das_Fossil@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Its totaly easy:

      1. Ban the apps
      2. Block major instances
      3. Jail some instance admins who doesn’t shut down (and make a show out of it)

      No, you will not get the hobby revolutionary this way who really wants to “fight the man”, but you surely will scare away the nepalese version of the average joe and with this effectively killing the networks there for main stream adoption.

      • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Not familiar with the other examples, but Lemmy doesn’t need an app. Can get to it via browser. Maybe the others need one?

        • Das_Fossil@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Websites you can block via DNS - yes, i know that this can also be fairly easy circumvented - but the folks who know this are NOT the target audience for state action like that.

          • EndlessNightmare@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Oh, yeah I know that sites can be blocked easily enough. My comment was more about whether specific apps are needed. For example, I rarely put apps for specific websites on my phone and instead just use the browser. Cuts way down on ads and other bullshit.

    • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      2 days ago

      I am curious how they are planning to ban Mastodon. I am assuming they are going to block say the top 25 instances?

      • magguzu@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Hate to say it but it honestly doesn’t sound crazy hard to just block any instance that pops up. Yes it’s whack a mole but if it’s an automated script, it can just crawl through a backdoor instance and ban any domain it sees.

        • deadcream@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          47
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Yeah that’s a solved problem. Iran, Russia, China and other countries have gone through this “stages of denial” process years ago. It starts with “haha they are incompetent and can’t block everything” and 10 years later half the Internet is blocked and you have prison sentencing for accessing “illegal” information (for the flgood of the people of course). Anyone who claims that internet censorship is not possible is a naive person fortunate enough to live in a place where it’s not a thing.

          “IT people/programmers are furry gay liberals” is a myth. There are plenty of bootlickers among them, like in any large enough group of people that’s not defined by a specific ideology/political affiliation.

          • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 day ago

            As someone who is friends with many furry gay liberal IT dudes and dudettes.

            I can’t name a single one that wouldn’t bend the knee the moment their job is threatened and their option is getting fired and risking their entire career or just being a good cog in the machine.

            The people who bend the knee the fastest tend to be the ones most at risk of being abused by the powers that be should they not comply. It’s the very fundamental reason that revolutions tend to be so explosive. There’s a LONG build up of people not pushing against authority because of fear and security.

            So till the breaking point where the gay furry liberals have no options and it’s death or do what their bosses tell them. You can full well expect them to work right along with the bootlickers. They just are going to bitch about it more in the break room then the bootlickers.

          • sqgl@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 day ago

            They will block all instances except the ones registered. They just want a point of contact for when there is illegal activity. Yes it becomes a problem if they make criticizing the government legal but it is a democracy for now.

      • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        And as we all know, that would not ban it entirely. They’d have to block every instance, every new instance that comes online, the main web page, the code repository, etc., to even have a hope of banning it.

        • Railcar8095@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 day ago

          There are sites dedicated to listing all federated lemmy instances. Knowing the FOSS nerds, surely there’s even an API already.

          Some might slip, but very few large ones. That’s if the government cares about lemmy

          • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            The fact it’s interconnected makes it easy to just worm your way though banning everything.

            Doesn’t matter if it’s all independently hosted. The greatest strength of the frediverse is the fact it’s federated.

            That also it’s biggest fuck up point. These arent wholely independent forums.

            And if the frediverse has to fully defederate everything to prevent itself from being scrubbed away. It defeats the entire fucking point.

            Cause at that point just fucking go back to forums.

            • Railcar8095@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              20 hours ago

              I think they best solution here is just easy to deploy proxies, it prevents banning by DNS or IP. More than that and they might as well just put the great firewall.

          • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            The problem is that if you can access one, you can access all of them. It doesn’t even matter how you access the one. Even if you access it over tor, as long as you can get to one instance, you’re in the Federation.

        • DFX4509B@lemmy.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          Mastodon’s main code repo is on GitHub, a government could just pressure MS to take down that repo, although that isn’t going to account for anyone self-hosting an instance and also hosting their own git repos outside of any of the major hosts.

          In order to take down self-hosted instances, they’d have to raid people’s homes and take out their physical servers assuming they have physical servers in their place.

          • shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’m betting GitHub is not the only place that the code repo is mirrored. Sure, it might be there, but something tells me it’s on a bunch of people’s computers as well, for people who work on it, or have just forked the repository. And there’s probably even copies of it on other mirrors, such as Code Bird, etc. in private repositories.

          • fuzzzerd@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            I don’t know when Microsoft would cave, but Nepal asking them to remove it probably isn’t going to that level. Maybe they geoblock but I can’t see them removing it for a everyone.

          • Venia Silente@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            assuming they have physical servers in their place.

            Nope, in that particular case they just have to hand over a strongly worded letter (and a small bribe) to the ISP.

    • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Well, if they start by blocking the clients, then block any webpage or server sending / receiving ActivityPub packets at the ISP level, they could possibly cut it off. Heck, just spin up a new Mastodon or Lemmy server, send out a ping, and have every Nepalese ISP & mobile provider block all domains and IPs that respond.

        • solrize@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          I guess that centralized server thing is working out real well then. /s

              • Holytimes@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                If it’s federated it’s easy to block. If it’s not it’s too small to care about really.

                And if you just remove the ability for federation to function in your country you have fundamentally broken the system making it basically unusable for your people.

                The federvise is extremely weak to censorship for your avg joe because it’s strongest point the federation system is also it’s biggest Achilles heel.

                With out federation it’s just a series of less useful forums and blogs.

                The system is designed to prevent corporate ownership from destroying it. But the idea that you can prevent a government and those in control of the infrastructure from blocking it? Is laughable.

                You can in small ways wrong around it but you don’t need 100% censorship to win the game of cat and mouse. Even 50% of the biggest instances wins you the game.

        • solrize@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          2 days ago

          Bah, more reason to avoid Signal. For private communications I want an antisocial network, not the opposite.

          • Zak@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 day ago

            I think it’s a silly feature for a messaging app, but it has no impact on me if I ignore the feature.

            • solrize@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              It does say something about the mindset of the vendor, which is a legit reason to decide not to use an app. From what I can tell, Teslas are pretty good cars despite some issues here and there. But Elon’s antics are enough to make me decide not to buy one.

              • Zak@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 day ago

                I’m not sure adding a questionable social feature to a messaging app is reasonably comparable to the very long list of insane and/or evil shit Musk has done.

                Like any messaging system, Signal’s utility is proportional to its userbase. If stories get more people to use it without making it worse for people who don’t care, then they’re a good idea even if I think everything else about the concept is bad.

                • solrize@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 day ago

                  A bar (place where you drink) is another type of a messaging system. You can meet people in them and have conversations there. That doesn’t mean it’s best to crowd everyone into one giant bar claiming that increases utility, compared with letting people freely open their own bars. Especially if the avowed purpose of the bar is enabling private conversations (giving you and your friend Bob a private place to talk, as opposed to creating a meeting place for strangers).

                  I can understand visiting a giant bar if I want to mingle with randos in public. If I want to talk privately with my friend, I want a small, private bar, preferably one whose existence is not known to anyone outside of my friend group. If the giant bar operator is going out of his way to prevent me from doing that, I have to say he is up to something not so good.

                  Sorry about the strained analogy but at least it didn’t mention cars. Well, until just now.

              • egrets@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                1 day ago

                Use whatever software you want, more power to you, but I’m not totally convinced that “chaired by a fascist transphobic multibillionaire oligarch who actively subverts democracy at every opportunity” and “introduced a feature I don’t want to use into my free secure messaging app” are even close to equivocal?

                • solrize@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 day ago

                  I’m bothered mostly by the default Signal app’s inability to use a self-hosted server instead of signal.com’s own server. I’ve been skeptical towards Signal because of that. The social media feature is something I hadn’t heard of til just now. It reinforces my skepticism but it’s just another issue. Both tell me that Signal is out to somehow monetize (and maybe spy on) other people’s private relationships in a captive userbase, sort of like, you know, Marc Zuckerberg. I’d prefer to avoid dealing with people like that, especially where privacy apps are concerned.

                  I’d be more interested in Signal if I could use my own server without having to get people to install modified clients.

          • redjard@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            It’s completely removable with one setting. No nags or anti-patterns or design holes.
            If it stops a few from sticking with whatsapp because signal lacks that “feature”, I’d say it’s worth it.

      • Ulrich@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Depends on how you want to look at it. They have “stories” which could most certainly be considered that.

    • sqgl@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Telegram allowed. It does not e2e encrypt by default. How will they make sure that option isn’t chosen by Nepalese?

      All Nepal is asking for is registration so that there is a point of contact if there are any complaints. Telegram contacted Nepal after being banned.

      Others didn’t respond and deliberately have no contact details online.

      I tried to contact Reddit in Sydney about my ban but could only make them down to a multi-client large office building in Barangaroo.

      This isn’t necessarily a bad move on Nepal’s part.

  • DFX4509B@lemmy.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Nepal went full iron curtain. Hope the EU, US, and UK don’t get any ideas…

  • danA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    deleted by creator

  • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    2 days ago

    I’m not sure what the big deal is here. They’re dealing with a known rise in crime and fraud. this isn’t just a bogeyman “save the children” thing, it’s that they want to have access to the platform to keep things safe for their people and everyone else.

    I think it’s more than reasonable to have a specific point of contact if there’s any issues related to a criminal investigation. And the lack of response from the Big Two is evidence that they don’t care.

    • Venia Silente@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Assocks. They don’t need (backend-level) access to the platform in order to fight that. They just have to do good, boots-on-the-ground detective work. In other words, earn their salaries. We don’t precime-inalize silverware companies because people may use kitchen knives to kill each other.

      • Endymion_Mallorn@kbin.melroy.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        19 hours ago

        No, but if one brand of knife is used in the majority of a category of crimes, it’s fair that the government should have a clear point of contact with the manufacturer to help identify why it’s happening and how it can be prevented.

        Realize this: The Nepalese government is being treated the same way as a “normal” person - they’re having trouble prosecuting these crimes because they’re not being given any access to hidden or deleted posts. They’re having to go though the useless fake support chats and the like. What they’re demanding, mostly, is that they have a known human being who will cooperate with the government and to whom they have a clear and unambiguous connection. Frankly speaking, I think that ought to be a bare-minimum for any company anywhere. I don’t support corporate sovereignty or corporate personhood. If you have a company operating in a nation, that nation should always have a clear point of contact for law enforcement & taxation purposes, as well as more general communication when needed.