• LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 days ago

    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.

  • Viri4thus@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    38
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    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.

    • Fizz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 days ago

      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.

        • Fizz@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          9 days ago

          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.

          • Viri4thus@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            21
            ·
            9 days ago

            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.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              11
              ·
              8 days ago

              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.

            • Bazoogle@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              8 days ago

              Sorry about your luck, but it just so happens your local government doesn’t agree with this opinion. You’re now going to be jailed and beaten until you’re formed, at which point you will be killed. Big brother is watching you

  • Amoxtli@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    56
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    If only the US and EU had this to suppress the “Far Right”. Democracy would be protected.

  • Rooskie91@discuss.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    67
    ·
    9 days ago

    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.

    • asbestos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      They do this because they can and because people let them. Every government wants as much control as possible over everything, web being the (relatively) newest target. It’s on us to oppose that.

    • forrgott@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      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…

    • Kairos@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 days ago

      Yes because as we all know there’s a shortage of right wing dipshits who don’t hide their identities.

    • alphabethunter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      9 days ago

      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.

      • Fizz@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 days ago

        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.