265
Ahoy maties, I've got a confession to make...
(www.youtube.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 03 Jul 2023
265 points (93.2% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54746 readers
226 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Terrorist
Not sure how blocking ads fits into that definition. Some of us just don't want to hear about Raid shadow legends or the latest food delivery scam.
That said from now on whenever I install uBlock in my head I will hear "bomb has been planted".
I feel like any company who isn't making money off of you will gladly call you a terrorist and will urge their government to call you one as well, especially for people who use their sites and use ad blockers, if given the opportunity.
The judge in question had already decided that the person was a terrorist, and used all the privacy measures they used as evidence that they had something to hide.
It wasn't just the fact that they used ad blockers, but the fact that they used encryption and software that most people wouldn't bother to learn. That, and the fact that they taught others to do the same. Apparently, being technologically literate and concerned about privacy makes you a terrorist.
It's disgusting that a judge can rule on things that they are totally ignorant about. I haven't followed the entire thing, so I don't know if there was a ruling or if the trial is still ongoing, but there have been articles about the judge's statements.