Hi, Pakistan? You do know anyone can edit Wikipedia, right? You don't have to ask Pakistan's Telecommunications Authority has "degraded" Wikipedia service in the country on the grounds that the crowdsourced encyclopedia was not censoring "sacrilegious" content, and warned it may block the site altogether. A tweet from the Authority (PTA) explains that it approached Wikipedia and asked the website to remove …
Tsk, tsk, tsk. Come now, you're not expecting a backwards, authoritarian government to actually handle things itself, now are you ?
We're talking about some midieval adminitrative busybody. Of course it's up to someone else to deal with the problem and, until it is, said adminitrative busybody from the millennia before last will wield the only thing he (because of course it's a he) knows : the banhammer.
Nice, heavy and comforting in the mind, he will teach a lesson to all those "modern" barbarians : don't fuck with Pakistan.
Well we have no intention of fucking with Pakistan. It can stay in 1491 if it wants.
It's the way of governments, make a decision (often daft) and delegate enactment. Granted, a telco shouldn't have a problem, but politicians editing Wikipedia! Not without kindergarten-level hand holding. And the content: laced with more drivel, more trite and more uninformed and biased self-serving opinions. I'm scared... hold me!
There is a surprising amount if if ignorance about Pakistan realpolitik. This is almost certainly not about religion but about the corrupt administration and corrupt military de facto dictatorship trying to control a losing narrative and increasing public anger about the shambolic handling of the economy and inflation which they are trying hide from public view. Blasphemy is just a convenient excuse and everyone who know anything about the current administration of Pakistan knows that these blood sucking parasites do not care about anything other than their ill gotten wealth and relocating abroad.
I know it's trendy to crap over religion but common guys. This is just lazy
True and their definition of 'smut' is quite wide-reaching.
Just the word 'woman' into any browser on safe-mode and you will already have 'smut'.
My guess is that the Pakistani authorities are authoritarian in nature and expect other bodies to be equally so.
And with authoritarian bodies you have to project strength and demand.
And so, the very idea that they could summon 100 underlings to go and actually make the changes themselves is outside of their ken.
Who would be weak enough to let anyone to do that?
Probably the same people who let their womenfolk outdoors without the permission of their father, brother or husband.
except in the UK, where the Government want to make such speech illegal
If this article and this one are correct then the EU is trying to go full 1984 as well with its Chat Control proposal.
TL;DR: mandatory mass surveillance of all electronic communications because "think of the children".
While I do agree that given our powers of communication have increased we should be willing to give up some privacy to ensure there is no untoward messaging regarding trafficking or exploitation, I think our freedom of speech needs to be strengthened in order to prevent the necessity of more open communications from being oppressed further.
Many years ago a computer magazine (PC Pro?) experimented with editing Wikipedia. They made three edits. The first was the equivalent of changing Trump to the Democrat Party, this was corrected within minutes. The second change, not so current or divisive a subject, lasted a day or two. The final change was to Buzz Aldrin's page. His date of birth was left unchanged but the day was changed from Wednesday to Thursday (or a similar slip) and this was still published several months on.
The result was not altogether surprising. There was less access and the Internet was still a frontier in a good way - motives were assumed to be good and the Aldrin change was quite subtle.
Some years ago, Trump WAS a Democrat. Here is the wishy-washy, senile old idiot's Party affiliation since 1987:
Republican from 1987–1999, Reform from 1999–2001, Democrat from 2001–2009, Republican from 2009–2011, Independent from 2011–2012, Republican from 2012 - present. Obviously subject to change without notice.
And trust me, he'll change his mind again if it makes sense to Trump, the only person on the planet who is important. It absolutely cracks me up that the Senior Leadership in the Republican Party keep saying that Trump is one of them. Dumb-asses, the lot of 'em.
1. Block access to the wider internet from Pakistan
2. See how long it takes them to notice.
3. Watch the Indians double over laughing.
4. Watch Saudia, Afghanistan, Iran, and even the likes of Alabama, collectively facepalm and quietly tell Pakistan that they’ve making crazed religious fanatics look bad.
A lot of Modi’s supporters are semi-detached from the 21st century, but Modi isn’t. A rather considerable portion of the Pakistani public are semi-detached from the 14th century, and some of their theocrats from the 7th century. (Ok, maybe the 8th…) Shutting off all contact with the wider Internet would suit a significant chunk of Pakistan just fine. India, not so much.
Ha Ha, you're funny, or delusional, of both. Wikipedia regularly censors any conservative viewpoint that doesn't fit in with their liberal agenda. Several of my edits, which were nothing but the truth, have been removed almost as fast as they were entered. Never rely on Wikipedia if you want the truth regarding anything remotely political. All they're good for is seeing pictures of plants and animals.
"Wikipedia regularly censors any conservative viewpoint"
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Thats a thing that only deals with facts not "viewpoints" or opinion. Maybe you should have read the Wikipedia article on the subject before posting such nonsense or defacing Wikipedia pages.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
