• conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    They not only can, trivially. They unconditionally must.

    It is not possible to ever be a reputable organization ever again if you have to choose between censoring content globally for an authoritarian government and shutting down in that country, and censoring content globally is something they genuinely consider. Open, fact based information is their entire reason for existing.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      But the information is already available archived elsewhere? Don’t you think the people of India deserve to be educated?

      • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        Being available elsewhere is entirely irrelevant. Wikipedia must stand against totalitarian censorship to resemble a reputable organization.

        Complying is unforgivable.

        • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Dude, what bad does this do? To the Indian people, to you? The information has already been plastered all over the internet, including archives of said article, which anyone may access at their will and command. You want billions of Indian peoples to suffer and be deprived of intellectual revolution for what, grinding a utopic axe? Ceasing operations in India would do way more damage to Wikipedia’s goal.

          • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            It sets an absolutely obscene precedent that a government can globally restrict information. Even global terrible actors like Russia and China haven’t succeeded at that.

            Yes, that precedent is 1000 orders of magnitude more harm than India losing access (which they won’t, because the entirety of Wikipedia is open source and would be mirrored in the country instantly. But even if they actually would, it is literally impossible to get anywhere near the harm of the precedent this sets).

            • Aatube@kbin.melroy.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              It sets an absolutely obscene precedent that a government can globally restrict information

              Again, the information is still everywhere.

              Even global terrible actors like Russia and China haven’t succeeded at that.

              Actually, the Chinese Wikipedia used to have a systemic bias in favor of the CPC before China blocked it, after which the bias was changed.

              because the entirety of Wikipedia is open source and would be mirrored in the country instantly

              It’s a bit elitist to restrict information—weapons of revolution—to those who know how to find a mirror website. Why don’t you survey the Chinese nationals in-person to see if they know how to get on Wikipedia? Plus, to avoid block evasion, no mirrors would be able to edit Wikipedia.