"oh the indignity of not having internet for 118 hours, personally didn't have it for much of my childhood"

I understand what you're trying to say and I agree with that, but this is actually different. This is not an inconvenience as much a state censorship. It's the state literally disallowing people talking to each other. It's Orwellian: "we don't like what you're talking about, so we're going to make you completely unable to"

It's not the 80s or 90s anymore. The internet is rhe global backbone of how people communicate with each other. Shutting down access is a clear action of censorship and oppression.

> from an outsider America has become one mouthpiece, rarely do I see dissenting voices in the media

You don't clearly see America, there are at least two big mouthpieces. While I've never heard anyone praise the Iranian or Venezuelan government, I've heard many protest US intervention.

> how its written feels alot like propaganda (not saying the content is invalid)

I agree it sounds like propaganda. But in this case I think it's fair, the situation is almost black and white.

> the indignity of not having internet for 118 hours...not to diminish the other sad loss of life

Maybe they should've emphasized: the loss of life (and general restriction on daily living, offline) is the main problem, no internet for 118 hours is a symptom.

> even tech articles have become partisan

True. But again, this case (criticizing the Iranian regime) is so close to clear-cut black and white, it shouldn't even be partisan.

They cut the internet so they could machine gun people, not stop them from ordering DoorDash.

>rarely do I see dissenting voices in the media...at the same time they Kidnap a foreign leader and its all wow look how great we are.

I'm not sure if you meant to imply that there was a uniform media response of "look how great we are" vis-a-vis the abduction of Maduro? If you did, I have to disagree. A significant amount of US media time was dedicated to how not-great this was.

The US media is full of propaganda. I am not disputing that. All I am saying is that the response to the Maduro abduction was not a uniform "This is great!"

People don't do politics anymore, they get their priorities the other way around (geopolitics before the politics of their own house, workplace or city), and the little they do is heavily misplaced (online instead of physically demonstrating).

On top of that add the huge boom of data in politics. No politician anymore has programs or language aiming at representing most of the voters, but it only focuses to get 50%+1, which in practice means that most politicians aim for the majority of the swing voters.

Yes, the US is not the center of the universe and there’s lots of room for different perspectives, but there is nothing good that can be said about the regime in Iran.

China, for sure there a lot of good that can be said about the Chinese government. Of course China’s human rights abuses have to be recognized, but we should also recognize the good things like economic and technological development. And I’m sympathetic to Taiwanese independence, but China’s own position should also be give a fair shake. Pretty much all governments, including the US, are a mix of good and bad.

But name one redeeming point of the regime in Iran. Why have any sympathy for the regime at all?

> Think what's going on in Iran is very sad, but

> the above is not to diminish the other sad loss of life

That's a lot of caveats.

The problem with other freedom-loving nations, the EU, etc is that they're a bunch of cowards and I feel like America is the only place that can stand up to the regimes like Iran/China. Who else if not US?

Iran controls a string of proxies in Lebanon, Yemen and other places. Are you sure you're not forgetting that piece? When you write that we had 80 years of relatively peaceful times, you're glossing over that fact.

When thinking about an entire country, "good/bad" doesn't make sense as a category. In Iran, the people are protesting and holy hell are there a ton of people risking their lives for the chance for a better life with less oppression, without hyperinflation, with some sort of voice in their own governance. The ruling class can not be conflated with the populace. The populace can not be conflated with the populace for that matter, there's no "one" thing even under a shared culture. This is also true in the US, you can't conflate the ruling class with the people in the streets ringing bells and blowing horns and risking their lives and freedom against a tyrannical government seeking to arrest millions of people and deport some of them.

Nothing is completely free of politics, much less the existence of the Internet, and it's incredibly important to realize the impact that technology has on the fabric of society.

> oh the indignity of not having internet for 118 hours,

This is not even remotely close to the meaning or impact of the site that's linked. It's about the dignity of life, the gunning down of thousands of people by their government, and the governments attempts to continue oppression by hiding their actions behind a veil. Your comment viewed in its most positive light is crass, more realistically is heartless and cruel.

My guess: you're commenting on the US from a Russified country, or from China? That's the only perspective on the world that I can imagine generating your statements, and if I'm wrong I'd love to know.

> that is its always Iran/China bad and at the same time they Kidnap a foreign leader and its all wow look how great we are.

If you think American news is weird, you should try reading Chinese news. English ones like China Daily or globaltimes.cn, I would read it a lot when I was in China since American news sources were blocked.

It has gotten better since 2002, but is still pretty bizarre in how they frame conflicts. Forget CNN-level bias, they have FoxNews-level bias in how they do the news.

> rarely do I see dissenting voices in the media, that is its always Iran/China bad and at the same time they Kidnap a foreign leader and its all wow look how great we are.

You are not looking too hard at all. There are lots of dissenting opinions, in fact I'd wager that if you excluded official government mouthpieces, the lion's share of opinion (both private individuals as well as established media) is trending to open criticality of the US government's choices.

> how its written feels alot like propaganda

I almost feel bad for the established old school media companies. One side says they are spewing propaganda, the other side says they're ignoring it altogether. Both cannot be simultaneously true.

> but from an outsider America has become one mouthpiece

Really? As a naturalized American I see diversity in the USA's media. Do you have an example?

From what I see, there are two big voices in the media politically.

> rarely do I see dissenting voices in the media

Again, we need an example. I see the official line from the current party in power, and the counter arguements from the mainstream media as a whole. The current party only has a media output from very few mainstream sources.

"China bad"?

Do you have any idea how much Chinese economic leverage has caused Hollywood to censor against CCCP criticism?

As for Iran, we have a literal embargo, so it's not quite the same.

lol we are here because 75 years ago in the era of peace and tranquility, CIA deposed the democratically elected secular leader of iran

>does feel its back to might is right, and the last 80 years of relative peaceful times is sunsetting.

Depending on your perspective, 'might is right' never changed. The US has forced its policies on other nations through quiet force for a long time. I think the only thing that's changed is that Trump wants to say the quiet part out loud now which makes it way easier to push back on. Combine that with the fact that Trump has 0 political ambitions outside of just being in power and it becomes very easy to just ignore what you hear coming from the top. Often it clearly has no thought put behind it, seems vindictive in nature, and is forgotten the next day, like a child's tantrum. To circle back a little, now that the US in such a passive state due to this, a lot of other countries feel safer to push their influence on the world because they see no repercussions for what others are doing.

Why is the top comment always this sort of concern troll derailing the topic? It seems intentional at this point to divert discussion.

Have you been on the Internet as an adult ever? Have you been on X? What about Facebook? America is "one mouthpiece"? This is one of the most puzzling takes I've ever seen.

Americans literally post 10K articles a day about how bad the administration is and all the bad that will result from going to Venezuela ... and multiply that for literally every other thing the govt does. There isn't one thing that happens that doesn't have hundreds of posts online and in papers explaining why America is so evil for doing it.

You have no idea what you are talking about. Have you sampled the media landscape in Tehran or Beijing? I have sampled both ... FROM those locations. Its night and day.

Even the media landscape in your typical Western Alliance country (Singapore, Japan, South Korea, UK ... etc.) cannot come close to what you see in America.

   that is its always Iran/China bad and at the same time they Kidnap a foreign leader and its all wow look how great we are.

  oh the indignity of not having internet for 118 hours, personally didn't have it for much of my childhood

It's very, very different than a nation losing access to the internet because of technical issues (or, in your case, because it wasn't invented/popularized yet).

> the indignity of not having internet for 118 hours

...during mass violence against the population.

>Being able to completely turn off the Internet in your country seems to be a non-negotiable capability to develop for any non-democratic state.

Which technologically advanced democratic countries DON'T have this capability already developed and deployed?

Do you think the 3 letter agencies in the likes of UK, Israel, Australia, Canada, Germany, Finland, Sweden, etc don't know how to turn off the internet in their countries? They'd be really incompetent if they don't.

Switzerland even had all its bridges wired with explosives from like the 19th century and all the way through the cold war to blow them up inc ase of an invasion.

Do you think the internet infra is somehow spared this kind of strategic planning?

My guess is that in Ukraine the Russian EW systems are deployed tens of kilometers back from the line of contact to protect them from artillery strikes and fiber optic drones. These Russian EW systems are likely used to protect command posts and logistics bases but not the line of contact.

But because Iran is not yet an active war zone the Iranians can deploy those systems close to the cities.

Also, Starlink terminals can be located via their RF emissions. So using a Starlink terminal in Iran seems to come with a high risk that security forces can locate and arrest you.

In addition to jamming the radio signals directly, Starlink terminals use GPS, so jamming GPS can hurt connectivity. Iran has been jamming GPS in an effort to reduce the effectiveness of foreign military attacks, but maybe they've stepped it up a notch in the past week. People in Ukraine are probably so accustomed to GPS jamming that they've all gone to Advanced -> Debug Data -> "Use Starlink positioning exclusively".

Ukraine has one other advantage: The jamming tends to come from one direction. If you set up a barrier on that side of the antenna, the signal from the satellites is less likely to be drowned out. People in Iran have no idea where the jammers are in related to themselves. If they're in a city, they might be surrounded.

Starlink terminals also require a clear view of the sky and they broadcast on certain frequencies, so it's quite possible for governments to find the terminals and confiscate/destroy them. Still, it's a lot more difficult to shut down than a few fiber optic lines.

> Still wonder how exactly they are interdicting Starlink…

It's an active transmitter actively shouting "I'm here!" to the right gear.

IIRC, the Ukrainians found it's best to have a nice long wire between you and the terminal for this reason.

To be fair though, the web can heavily and easily be flooded by foreign actors like the US in case of Iran.

It's naive to think that our countries don't play the influence and propaganda war online.

> Still wonder how exactly they are interdicting Starlink

a good cyberwarfare attack would be disabling whatever is being used to prevent Starlink from working. Even if it only lasts for 12 hours the flood of images, video, and just general communication from inside Iran to the world would be a blow to the regime.

To be fair, shutting down all communications and power are our only defense against a runaway AI system.

This is a capability that makes sense to have to use when absolutely necessary.

I think the differentiator is always when governments choose to employ these things.

Frankly, we need to get to a place where it is impossible to do shut down the internet in a country like this. P2P and distributed networks might see a resurgence here

The west would cut the internet the second shit got real. No question.

Europe is already flirting with it. Look at their draconian internet speech laws. If you think that ISPs would try to stand up to the government you should read about how quickly they bent over after the PATRIOT act.

This is exceeding the scale of the Tiananmen Square Massacre as far as death toll is concerned*

*According to a leaked diplomatic cable: https://www.axios.com/2018/01/05/declassified-cable-estimate...

If they cut off the internet how did this information get out and how can it be verified? There would be video of this kind of thing if it wasn’t just the Americans building support for regime change; I have yet to see any.

Unverified though - people are saying more in the range of 2000.

PS

In Islam they don't do cremation and burial is within a day before next sunset hence the horrible footage of hospitals releasing bodies publicly in the street - it is part of their faith and even the regime respects it.

As someone very vocal on Iran, I find these recriminations shallow and generally intended to be punitive about those positions in those others places.

By the same precedent, it opens up Iranian human rights activists to the same endless accusations — when were you vocal on M23, Haiti, Kashmir, Kurds, Muslims in India, etc etc. I don't think it's countless silent organizations, and those organizations or activists are generally not in position to be able to influence the IRI or IRGC.

I think you have distinguish between feckless organizations like the ITU, and say, college student campus activists.

If you're an American, what could protesting Iran possibly accomplish? They are already sanctioned out the wazoo and our government already doesn't like the government there.

what are you referring to? Amnesty International, to take one example, has a huge banner supporting Iran's protestors on their homepage rn

https://www.amnesty.org/en/

I think this gives further evidence that these huge campaigns and marches/protests/street graffiti are very deliberate manipulation by certain groups and a lot of money.

On the other hand, there are a lot of people that is suddenly very worried about Iran but had nothing to say about other places.

Some, even support the terrible things that are going on, today and for a very long time, in those other places.

Well, for starters, one person really can’t care about every possible issue, even if they wanted to. So people and groups may get very passionate about one thing that really pulls on the heartstrings, hits close to home, or is more related to their own country’s policies. (For example, those protesting Palestine may protest US’s typically very strong support of Israel.)

What am I going to do when I wake up to the news that yet another country under the control of religious fanatics is abusing their people? Demand the US invades them? Go to the streets every single day for every new issue (of which there are countless)? Demand sanctions against their government (already broadly exists)? Fly there myself? (Not sure if possible, and what help would that do?)

Who is choosing to be silent about Iran? Lack of knowledge, maybe, but deliberate planning? That would be the fault of media and perhaps the wealthy controlling the media, if it’s happening. Not the everyday person. I guarantee you, next to no one wakes up and decides “hm, I will choose to not talk about X atrocity today.”

You’re angry at the wrong people.

Human lives have the same value, but does Iran suppress the protesters with the tacit approval or active support of the West? If not who to protest against then? The Ayatollah?

Well same thing as gaza, idk why the west mostly supports Israel. Is it because they're more "like us" than gazans?

I mean...how about we just not kill each other. Kept the drawn lines, make "settlers" illegal and be done with it.

But nah we all tribal monkeys, our species is poisoned by evolution. So we'll never stop taking from each other, killing each other.

Such as?

Are you speaking out, protesting, or otherwise taking the actions that you are accusing others of abstaining from?

It seems as if the the word genocide has no use if it’s your own people your mass killing.

Which orgs are you talking about specifically? Don't sling mud in such a vague way. Here's Amnesty's homepage https://www.amnesty.org/en/. The UN has already issued statements. What do you mean exactly? Random nobodies on social media?

Worse. We had an Iranian demonstration in Seattle, and "Free Palestine" protestors came there with megaphones to disrupt it.

Because that's not what they are - they are communists trying to mix the right ingredients for their next rage cycle.

We’ve always been at war with Eastasia.

Clearly other HN readers consider news of as many as 12,000 people possibly having been killed by their government to be important, and consider the discussion happening about it on this page to be interesting to them.

Posted by a single-purpose account no less.

It has pretty graphics.

Yeah, and heavily rewritten by AI. Every single sentence screams AI slop smell. I find that short content smells the most - AI tends to overfit its patterns even more strongly then.

America and Israel have more than enough money. you can sit this one out, lol.

Which ones? The ones protesting for a regime change in support of US/Israel intervention?

Or the ones that are counter-protesting that know foreign intervention will be a net negative for their country?

Same feelings for Saudi Arabia, I hope.

I had this same question recently. There's mesh networks like meshcore. But you would be limited to just sending text messages to other users. I would imagine the government would be able to easily identify and destroy such a network as well.

Satellites don't work because iran gov. is broadcasting gibberish causing satellite connections to drop.

Wasn't the original ARPANET entirely owned and controlled by the US government? I think it might've been resilient against attacks from people who didn't own the network but I would also be surprised to learn the US government couldn't shut it down if it wanted.

There is no tech solution ever possible to "The guys with guns showed up", and people in tech continuing to insist that they must maintain political apathy and solve real problems only as long as you can do it with code is literally part of the problem.

"Tech used to be a place without politics" is especially heinous. The entire time you insisted on eschewing politics, your boss sure as fuck wasn't.

https://archive.is/SNMH5

See also the protests in Serbia [1] led by university students, that have been also mostly ignored by both the EU and the USA. The EU commented "they will not accept or support a violent change of power in Serbia", and the USA claimed they do not support "those who undermine the rule of law or who forcefully take over government buildings."

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024%E2%80%93present_Serbian_a...

Can you make examples?

Illinois has 12 m people and a GDP over $1 trillion. I doubt most foreigners could place it on a map. There is no significant difference that it is part of a federation and Iran is not. People oversell these kind of Instagram sound-bites. It's really not a big deal.

I'd suspect most Americans have a relationship with far-off suffering the same as me: it's sad and I think we should contribute to alleviating it, but if I encounter sufficient sanctimony about it I'd rather go live my life.

Iran, Iraq, Israel, Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Kuwait, Saudi, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sudan, Libya, Yemen. It's kind of wild how the middle east has been at some kind of war with each other for more than half a century, possibly longer.

Meanwhile Europe aggressively killed each other during WWI and WWII and then went into a peaceful union with a free trading bloc.

Will there ever be a Middle-east union unification like EU in our lifetime?