Darkstar on Nostr: I completely agree with the analysis. Brazil's decision regarding the ban on X is ...

I completely agree with the analysis. Brazil's decision regarding the ban on X is concerning, not only for its content but also for how it was written. The text is extremely vague and broad, leaving room for dangerous interpretations. Imposing personal liability on company presidents, without clearly defining the means they must use to comply with the order, is a classic example of abuse of power. This type of authoritarian and undefined approach undermines the rule of law and puts individual freedoms at risk. No government or authority should have so much power to arbitrarily decide what can or cannot be done on the internet. This sets a dangerous precedent for future interventions and censorship, which is unacceptable in a democracy.

quoting
note1qq7…ysp4

What scares me in Brazil's X ban is how overly broad the wording in the judge's decision is:

"Internet providers, on behalf of their presidents (makes it personal legal liability), must add technological obstacles (literally anything) capable of making the use of X unfeasible."

It's not about blocking IPs or domains. It doesn't prescribe any specifics. It names companies that must comply, but only as examples. And it seems to strip corporate protections and goes straight into personal liability. All in just a few sentences.

Too broad. No one should have this much power.