Slashdot Mirror


Russian Government Threatening To Block Reddit Over Cannabis

An anonymous reader writes: The Russian Government is threatening to block the social linking site Reddit across its country if they do not comply with removing a thread dedicated to growing cannabis. According to a post on VK.com, Roskomnadzor the Russian FCC, has asked Reddit administrator to read their emails and their social media posts stating that they want /r/trees brought down which had posted an article about growing narcotic plants. Recently, Reddit changed its rules to allow illegal discussions on its site but they say that they would continue to block things such as copyrighted material.

88 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. It's already BEEN blocked. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/comments/3grpdf/tifu_by_getting_reddit_banned_in_russia/

    1. Re:It's already BEEN blocked. by Mashiki · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm surprised reddit didn't simply fall in step. They seem to have no problems banning users and subs already on things that they disagree with.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    2. Re:It's already BEEN blocked. by Vokkyt · · Score: 3, Informative

      No it isn't. I'm in St. Petersburg right now and can access it just fine.

      Going to the following link will result in an error 403, but you can browse anywhere else just fine, HTTPS and all. This should not be marked insightful.

    3. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I seem to recall that that user is not actually white. I am sure you will find another justification, however. *sighs* Save the drama for Reddit.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
    4. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's a matter of venue. Russia is a sovereign country with the privilege and right to outline acceptable behavior. If they don't like what you say, they can kick you out.

    5. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Funny, I don't need to eat any words. What did Mashiki say that was racist, and how is responding to him in such a prickish way appropriate in polite society?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    6. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by Stolovaya · · Score: 1

      Private citizens and organizations can censor, so you're wrong. While they're allowed to censor what goes on their site, for a site that once touted itself as a place for free speech...kind of hypocritical.

    7. Re:It's already BEEN blocked. by barc0001 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It isn't something a lot of Reddit users and probably admins disagree with so that is probably part of it. More importantly it's illegal in Russia and most of the world, but it is LEGAL in 4 (and counting) US states. So does Reddit start banning things that are illegal only in some places? What happens when Saudi Arabia's government objects to threads being posted with pictures showing women not appropriately dressed for Saudi Arabian standards? Or the subreddits for beer and craft brewing, etc I am sure are all highly illegal in several Muslim countries, gotta ban those too right?

    8. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by Krojack · · Score: 1

      I guess you haven't heard of /r/coontown which still exists even though /r/fatpeoplehate was banned.

    9. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      Go be a racist prick somewhere else. Reddit isn't for racist pricks. Get your own forum, perhaps?

      Hmm...now where was I racist? That's right I wasn't. But it sure makes it easy to see the face of 'social justice.' That being, step out of line and get called racist, I'm surprised you didn't toss in how I was sexist and two or three other made-up things since that seems to be the SJW MO these days.

      But, since /r/coontown is still alive and kicking, and I hazard you post there. I guess that you're a racist prick for posting there right? See how easy that works you filthy racist.

      Of course reddit bans subs like /r/fph or /r/neofag(hint it was banned because of feelings, didn't dox, and was in line with the rules). Subs like /r/srs or /r/srd /r/circlebroke however engage in targeted harassment of people, break the brigading rule, and all that fun stuff but are still around. I wonder why? Oh that's right, because there are admins who are mods, and ceo's who post in those subs...

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    10. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by Mashiki · · Score: 1

      That is the face of modern social justice. If they're not lying, they're inventing garbage to smear(you/someone else/etc) with.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    11. Re: It's already BEEN blocked. by doccus · · Score: 1

      Problem is that "everyone has their rights", but this doesn't indicate why white supremacists aren't allowed their right to hate niggers and make it absolutely clear that this is what they feel. Or why people don't have the right to make copies of stuff they bought. Or why, if it's only licensed, why they need to buy another license for the same thing on a different medium. Or why you're not allowed the right to sell weed. Or have sex with a minor who agrees to the act. Or be a minor and have sex with an adult. Or distribute pictures of yourself to your boy or girl friend naked when the boy/girl friend is not an adult either.

      Why are these rights not rights? Because collectively we decided through our respective governments that they are not rights you have to exercise because of their result on the welfare of others.

      Why is it wrong to be able to say "I am a racist and I refuse to change. I hate niggers, I believe they are spawn of Satan and are not even human"? Why is it wrong to draw pictures of gruesome tortures of black people and post them on the same reddit? After all, pictures of similar gruesomely burned bodies can be seen in any documentary on the Holocaust. Violence, or realistically believable threats of violence can be argued as a right that would infringe on the more important rights to safety and health of others, so this can easily be considered restricted. But absent that, why should reddit ban hateful bigoted screeds of morons who really REALLY don't have empathy for others if they don't appear to be nearly identical with their own perceived self?

      ANY reasoning to stop that can ONLY be justified with something other than "gwown ups realizing all people deserve wights". What about the right of the mad bigot?

      Because you don't merely have rights and some rights aren't valid by fiat.

      Rights equate with freedoms. A tolerant society should have freedoms "from". That is, freedoms "from" unlawful search and seizure, from discrimination, from , well, all those things that violate our rights to live a free and unfettered, secure life. Howevber, rights do NOT equate with "freedoms TO" engage in certain activities.. That is, freedoms to rape pillage, steal, and otherwise engage in activities that generally impinge on ANOTHER'S freedoms. So for a true understanding of whether the Russian gov't or Reddit is in the wrong, we need to look at who is supportive of the "freedoms from" end (if any), and who is acting in the "freedoms to" area (if any).

  2. Phew lucky there is no thread on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    distilling Vodka. Written by homosexuals ... who dislike Assad.

    1. Re:Phew lucky there is no thread on by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Huh? What's wrong with distilling Vodka in Russia?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Phew lucky there is no thread on by dane23 · · Score: 1
      --


      Warning! Keep Out of Eyes! Wash Out with Water! Don't Drink Soap! Dilute! Dilute!
  3. "allow illegal discussions on its site" by YoungManKlaus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Discussing cannabis growth is not illegal. Actually growing cannabis is.

    1. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by aevan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This is Russia. This is Russian Government. I'd wager illegal is whatever they decide it is.

    2. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      in some jurisdictions.

      An in some jurisdictions possession/sale is illegal.

      In most parts of the world there are landrace species of cannabis that just grows wild, as nature intended.

    3. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's probably just a red herring for a spot of "great firewall of China"-style censorship.

    4. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by umafuckit · · Score: 1

      This is true, but overgrow shut down under odd circumstances. See also here.

    5. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      In NO jurisdiction, at least none that I'm aware of, it's illegal to TALK about cannabis.

      If it is, please inform me so I can avoid jurisdictions that actually make KNOWLEDGE illegal.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Recently, Reddit changed its rules to allow illegal discussions on its site

      It doesn't say which "illegal discussions" it decided to allow, nor exactly what is illegal about them. Perhaps what they meant was "discussion of illegal activities"?

      I suspect whoever wrote that sentence wasn't really thinking about what they meant to say.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    7. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      USA. If you are found discussing how to grow canabis, you will be investigated by the police and they WILL find something. Even if they have to put it in your pocket. You in a car with your girlfriend has a tiny amount of weed and you get shot in a mistaken drug sting operation? Her possession is justification for the police shooting you dead.

      I don't know about you, but choosing between jail and death means I choose the one where I'm still alive.

    8. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Like I needed another reason to avoid going to this country...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re: "allow illegal discussions on its site" by umghhh · · Score: 1

      General population does not even want to do that.
      There is also an issue if they are capable of doing things like: making informed guesses, making and applying plans, monitoring them and modifying them to adjust to the actual conditions (that is beyond comprehension even of the well educated software people that we work with), following a process and diverting from it when necessary and when adverse effects are still acceptable, communicating efficiently, respecting people of different opinions while knowing borders of this respect e.g. I respect your views only to the point where they have a direct deadly consequences - but even that has exceptions. Most of the people have basic understanding what is good and bad. We fail miserably however when discussion touches difficult subjects obscured by our feelings and technical complexity (what to do when the blood test shows you have AIDS - despair or make another test?). A flock of such miserable animals shall make a reasonable decision? Even in simple cases that is difficult and decisions that are to betaken are usually of a type: a runaway train goes direction of group of children, you have a switch that can put the train on alternate rail where only a old,fat, dirty man is drinking a bottle of vodka - what do you decide? What if our fat buddy is a group of doctors working on a cure for cancer? This is all complicated but add to this huge size of any modern society and lack of common values between large groups of people in it (liberals and tea party associates in US for instance). Then come corruption - outright or because if it does not matter anyway then why I should not take some money for TTIP for instance? I guess now we have a vision of our democratic societies.
      If I be caught by police smoking a joint in Germany - my driving license will be gone and I can get it back only after I make an idiocy test - why?
      All the usual nazifems go wild because Amnesty International supports prostitution now. None of those nazifems asked sex workers actually - they do not care.
      In Russia these issues exist to but are expressed differently. It is easy to criticize and demand change. We all were very happy to criticize Assad - I think removal of Assad has still quite wide spread support in Western countries as it had back then when troubles started. The bloody hell that Syria has become since was predictable and exactly as it would happen if Assad was removed. I suggest we shall be very careful what we wish because we have to take responsibility after what we wished becomes reality - nobody wants all these thousands of refugees that come from north Africa and Syria now - they mostly come to Germany and Sweden - Germany did not want to have anything to do with toppling of Gaddafi - UK did, yet Germany accepts the refugees and UK defends itself as much as it can. It is easy to express well sounding wishes. To make the world better is not. After all these years I spent here, I think the best way to improve the world is to talk about it only - drinking your beverage of choice trough the night. The only consequence then is a headache.
      Bottom line is this: we do not want to, can and possibly should make important decisions - as imperfect and unfair as it is - it seems that the status quo is the best we can get. How sad, is it not?

    10. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by umghhh · · Score: 2

      You could get charged for conspiracy to grow and sell. You could read how that worked in case of charges of conspiracy to produce pr0n that mr. Zappa was once a victim. You do not have to do the actual thing. Sometimes expressed wish can do. Even if get away with it - you may incur significant losses in the mean time unless you are Frank Zappa.

    11. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by umghhh · · Score: 1

      C'mon - somebody has to play Judas. If we do not have well divided roles the world falls apart.

    12. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I can't help but think of https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by arth1 · · Score: 2

      This is Russia. This is Russian Government. I'd wager illegal is whatever they decide it is.

      Logically, it's not much different from the US government's Feinstein Amendment banning posting recipes for how to make explosives.
      In either case, it's suppressing knowledge instead of the illegal actions themselves.

    14. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by arth1 · · Score: 1

      If it is, please inform me so I can avoid jurisdictions that actually make KNOWLEDGE illegal.

      How about the US government?

    15. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by kilfarsnar · · Score: 2

      Growing cannabis in the US is still illegal at fed level. Just because a minority of deadsville states have legalized purchasing it, primarily to stop filling their prisons and ruining people lives for a relatively benign activity, doesn't mean we don't face jail time if caught with it across most of the country affecting the vast majority of the population.

      FTFY

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    16. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Hevel-Varik · · Score: 1

      Did you know this before he said it or do you know it because he said it, because people say all sorts of shit on the internet.

    17. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      We can disagree here. The states that have allowed it are having a budget surplus.. and trust me a surplus of money in government is a very rare thing.

      I'm with you -- potheads and their "don't give a shit" attitude about work quality is annoying... but I don't want to have a good chunk of my salary go for locking them up, nor do I want to have to pay for their welfare because they cannot get meaningful employment because of their criminal record. Nor do I want to deal with the increased crime rate when the only way to get cash to eat is to mug someone.

      Lets be real here. Other than profit for private prisons, is there any real reason to lock up potheads?

      1: It wastes money.
      2: It wastes bed space better used for violent felons.
      3: It removes people from the workforce.
      4: It ruins people's futures.
      5: It creates contempt for the legal system and government.
      6: The government is not a good gay dungeon master.

    18. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Growing cannabis in the US is still illegal at fed level. Just because a minority of deadsville states have legalized purchasing it, primarily to stop filling their prisons and ruining people lives for a relatively benign activity, doesn't mean we don't face jail time if caught with it across most of the country affecting the vast majority of the population.

      FTFY

      You forgot to mention cost. I highly suspect that if the Feds had given those "deadsville states", like Washington, serious grief about not respecting Federal Law, you would have seen a lot of cops holding people till Federal agents showed up. Probably more cops and people than there are Federal agents to investigate. Those wanted for Federal crimes would be moved to Federal holding facilities, where they would later be tried in Federal courts, and serve time in Federal prisons. I bet the last thing the Feds want is to fill their courts and prisons with casual pot smokers and small time dealers either.

    19. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the Feds (or the more reasonable among them) know that the writing is on the wall. They know that pot being illegal is stupid and that public opinion is against it, but they can't come out an say it yet. So they're letting these states take the lead to eventually provide cover for the Feds to officially change their policies.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    20. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by owl57 · · Score: 1

      AFAIK, the discussion itself is legal in Russia. But Roskomnadzor maintains a list of websites publicly displaying (in the most strict sense: I haven't heard of their attention to pages which require any kind of registration to read) "information harmful to children" and ISPs are required by law to "protect children" from viewing the sites in that list.

    21. Re:"allow illegal discussions on its site" by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Russia, duh.

      Specifically, this is Administrative Violations Codex, article 6.13, titled "Propaganda of narcotics, psychotropic substances or their precursors, plants containing narcotic or psychotropic substances or their precursors, and their parts containing narcotic or psychotropic substances or their precursors, and new potentially dangerous psychoactive substances".

      Note that it is not a part of criminal law, so the most you can get is a fine and a few days in jail. But this is also the legal basis for blocking websites that publish this info. And there is talk among the parliamentarians to make it an actual felony.

  4. approved discussion topics by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Central Committee has, however, approved and recommended the following:

    • How to get elected with fire bombs and terror scares.
    • How to co-govern with former-KGB and organized crime.
    • How to take territory back from former provinces.
    • How to shoot down airliners.
    • How to hate on Company of Heroes 2.
    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    1. Re:approved discussion topics by KiloByte · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How to get elected with fire bombs and terror scares.

      Actually, discussing how the FSB staged bombings to boost the Dear Leader's ratings gets you polonium tea.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    2. Re:approved discussion topics by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I meant to include "how to assassinate critics of the regime".

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:approved discussion topics by umghhh · · Score: 1

      They all are alike. Some have nicer slogans than the others and I admit I'd prefer to rot in GITMO listening to loud, shitty music than to die of polonium poisoning. Judging on my experience it works better to be an expert in a poor but not too poor country than in well developed one where your salary gets you less goods but a better chance to get replaced by cheap boyz from Zamunda. I accept them governments and their torture boyz because this is the best we can do not because I like it.

    4. Re:approved discussion topics by KGIII · · Score: 1

      Seriously? Hmm... No. I will take the polonium now and happily (comparatively) live out my remaining time in a pure opiate bliss. Drug the fuck out of me and do not perform any life-saving techniques.

      I will share what I feel are relevant (and rare-ish) Grateful Dead lyrics...

      Hang me, oh, hang me, so I'll be dead and gone.
      Hang me, oh, hang me, so I'll be dead and gone.
      I wouldn't mind your hanging boys but, you wait in jail so long.
      Oh Lord, I been all around this world.
                                                      -- I've Been All Around This World

      I worked at a detention facility and have spent a night in jail waiting to sober up so they could let me go. (I was still plenty drunk when I left). I would really rather be dead than spend my life in prison.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  5. The person claiming to be responsible... by tgv · · Score: 2

    Has posted a Today I Fucked Up about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/tifu/...

  6. How much of Reddit's revenue comes from Russia? by jcr · · Score: 1

    Seems to me that Reddit should run the numbers and tell Putin to go fuck himself.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:How much of Reddit's revenue comes from Russia? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Seems to me that Reddit should run the numbers and tell Putin to go fuck himself.

      Do they even have to run the numbers? Russian Redditors can probably setup up a proxy or VPN without much trouble.

      This is just a death-pang of the ancient city/nation-states outliving their usefulness. We have global communications now, not men on horses carrying parchment. Their technology is obsolete; we don't want to buy it.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  7. Silly Poster... by SeaFox · · Score: 1

    They should have discussed how to grow trees instead.

  8. Always call their bluff by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    This censorship push only works if people cooperate with it. If they are forced to block half the internet then the entire regime fails.

    Simply refuse to cooperate. Call their bluff.

    So Reddit gets blocked OFFICIALLY in Russia? So what? There are lots of tools to bypass that stuff and the more that Russia employs censorship the more Russians will employ anti censorship tools. Unless Russia goes full North Korea and isolates the entire Russian internet... they're not going to be able to control it.

    And frankly if they did go full north korea... why would Reddit care? Big US internet companies that have global penetration keep getting threatened by Spain or France or Russia... "do this or else"... if we didn't care if China blocked us then why would we care about Russia?

    Make my fucking day, punk.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
    1. Re:Always call their bluff by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Simply refuse to cooperate. Call their bluff.

      In Putin's Russia, bluff calls you

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:Always call their bluff by Karmashock · · Score: 2

      Don't kid yourself, there is a lot of filtering.

      We don't talk about it but... yeah. We filter everything. Does every organization do that? Not every organization is competent.

      --
      I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  9. Not cannabis by atomlib · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's not cannabis. FSKN (Federal Drug Control Service of the Russian Federation) didn't like this post which is about shrooms https://www.reddit.com/r/rudru... At the moment it's blocked in Russia on Reddit side as far as I can see. I suspect Reddit may get unblocked very soon because of that.

    1. Re:Not cannabis by atomlib · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Not cannabis by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      To clarify, Reddit introduced an IP-based block for this post, such that Russian IP addresses get 403. Consequently, RKN unblocked it.

      So basically Reddit is helping Russian authorities censor.

  10. Re:So what? Reddit is a business, nothing else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When write with no article, sound like chinaman.

  11. interesting by bekid2015 · · Score: 1

    very interesting post

    --
    Erfi Magazin online pentru copii
  12. Re:So... just to to make sure: by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

    "Last time i checked a country has the right to protect its youth from drugs..."

    I don't know where, or when you checked, but you better re-check. You are completely confused if you think that. There is this twisted and pervasive idea that if 51% of the population votes that my kid should have to do or refrain from doing something that I should have to comply. You can "protect" your kids from drugs, but don't lie to yourself and think you have a say regarding mine. I'll handle the raising of my own children, thank you very much.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  13. Re:more than that by Max_W · · Score: 1

    There are numerous models of portable ashtrays. Some of them are quite sophisticated.

  14. Re:So... just to to make sure: by gerddie · · Score: 1

    Last time i checked a country has the right to protect its youth from drugs...

    If protect its youth from drugs translates to prohibit these drugs for everybody then there is something wrong, especially when considering that a legal drugs like alcohol and tobacco are way more damaging than Canabis.

  15. Re:So what? Reddit is a business, nothing else by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    In that case the US (and quite a few other countries) should watch out. They're getting there.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  16. Re:So... just to to make sure: by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Sonny, I really enjoy that you consider me "youth", but frankly, as soon as you don't get asked for ID anymore when buying liquor, you're no longer "youth".

    So please stop protecting me, ok?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  17. Oh what glorious news by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Finally no more RT shills telling us about the wonders and joys of living in the greatest nation of the planet, under the beloved glorious Leader Wowa?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  18. Oh, Russia by Artem+S.+Tashkinov · · Score: 1

    It has already been blocked: http://reestr.rublacklist.net/... - welcome to Russia.

    Most sane people who value privacy and freedom in Russia use TOR or VPN, because far too many websites are blocked while they contain a single "infringing" document. Unfortunately when we're talking about HTTPS the only way to block the infringing document is to take down the whole website.

  19. Re:So... just to to make sure: by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    Do you really want the hassle of ID access for many websites?

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  20. Why? by MagickalMyst · · Score: 1

    Because growing plants is such a big threat to national security.

    Sheesh.

    --
    Political correctness is really just herd psychology pushed by insecure people who desperately seek social conformity.
    1. Re:Why? by KGIII · · Score: 1

      I am told, by my daughter no less, that my tomato plants are "the bomb." (These may not be actual tomato plants and I am not a huge fan of tomatoes so I will leave that up to you to decide. I do have a lovely garden and it does contain real tomatoes.) So, if my tomato plants are the bomb then I must be a terrorist and, of course, a threat to national security. It is only logical, after all.

      --
      "So long and thanks for all the fish."
  21. Re:So... just to to make sure: by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    No. Your webpage wants to ID me to access it. Ok.

    NEXT!

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  22. Re:So what? Reddit is a business, nothing else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Or how several countries fuck with Uber and so on and on and on?

    That was an odd example. Most countries have clear laws regulating passenger traffic that Uber clearly violates. There is no legal difference between Uber and any other illegal/gypsy cab, even if they come with a cool app and hype.

  23. Re:more than that by Malc · · Score: 1

    Do toilets at the Moscow airports count as an official smoking room? The thick fog of smoke makes it disgusting going for a slash every time I've transited through Moscow.

  24. No body actually read about it? by ouachiski · · Score: 2

    The post in question had nothing to do with cannabis. It was about indoor growing of Magic Mushrooms.

    --
    sorry for my comments, I'm drunk
    1. Re:No body actually read about it? by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      This is Slashdot, you expected anyone to actually RTFA? :)

    2. Re:No body actually read about it? by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

      So, growing them outdoors is perfectly OK, then, eh?

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  25. Re:more than that by Max_W · · Score: 1

    I do not know. I do not live in Russia. I've just read about fines for smoking not in the designated places for smoking and for dropping butts on the ground.

    Normally in airports there should be smoking areas made from a glass panes.

    At least they are making some effort to reduce smoking. It will not be fast for sure, as it is extremely difficult, almost impossible to quit smoking. Tobacco is kind of a drug too, which is extremely addictive. And a social fabric is important part of this addiction.

    At the same time, smoking, including passive one, is hazardous for health. It is already almost proven beyond doubt by medica science. Besides, butts on the gtound cause fires, especially in a forest.

  26. Bye... by buckfeta2014 · · Score: 1

    ... Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. And don't think of coming back, we don't give a shit if you create your own internet.

    --
    Buck Feta. You know what to do.
  27. Uuum WHO CARES! Let them block it! by rholtzjr · · Score: 1

    I guess they will try anything to get focus away from the Ukraine and MH17 (pay no attention to the psychopath behind the surface to air missile system, but look over here at the evil plant you are trying to grow).
    Well dang, I am thinking that giving them the knowledge would allow them to mellow out a bit and let them wake up from their vodka induced stupor so they do not again mistake a very large passenger plane for their own Russian-built fighter jet.

  28. Re:So... just to to make sure: by umghhh · · Score: 1

    That works only until the judge finds out that damage that your activities cause weight more than the benefits of your company as a parent.
    That works everywhere in the West. It also has its side effects - when one party accuses the other of something unthinkable and gets benefits from the judge or authority that deals with kids welfare. Seen that happening to parents. Kids get most hit but parents suffer there too. Sometimes it works of course and drug abusing sex offenders may be prohibited from abusing their children.

  29. Drugs are bad mmmkay...but jail is worse.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    When drugs are bad, factually educate people on why. One thing I know for sure is prison and jail are bad for people. How ever bad you think pot might be, prison and jail will fuck that person up more.

    If various drugs are illegal to protect people from said drugs, for gods sake, protect the people, don't incarcerate them and ruin their lives more than the drugs might.

  30. Re:So... just to to make sure: by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    My point is, you want "them to stop protecting you" because you are an adult. But how else they know that than by asking for an ID?

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  31. Re:Uuum WHO CARES! Let them block it! by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    The USA's CIA helped overthrow the legitimate government of Ukraine to put in the present one, and you somehow think Russia is the cause of problems in the region?

  32. This may actually improve anonymity systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    In order to be anonymous you need a crowd to blend into. If you add a bunch of reddit users to the list of drug sellers and buyers using anonymity systems it becomes much harder to pin-point what someone you know is using the anonymity system is doing. The same thing is true for blocking copyright content. If more people are forced into using the anonymity system it becomes more difficult to guess at who is doing more risky stuff based on just there network traffic use and spikes (like publishing a video of a protest would most likely look the same as illegally uploading copyright'd content). Without this anonymity set you can more easily take an educated guess that a user uploading large files is doing x,y, or z. Maybe all of which are illegal. If so the government can just bust down the door. If not then they'd have too many doors to bust down thus making it much more difficult to pin-point.

  33. Re:COLORADO!! by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    That's funny because I thought Colorado was still in the U.S. where it is illegal and you were only getting away with it because we have a president who refuses to enforce the laws of the United States.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  34. Re:COLORADO!! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    Can you coherently explain why, when they wanted to ban alcohol consumption on federal level, that took a Constitutional amendment; but when they wanted to ban other substances, somehow, magically, it's just a simple law?

    Where exactly in the Constitution does it grant Congress the authority to regulate the growth and consumption of drugs (or anything else) that doesn't cross the state boundary?

  35. Re:COLORADO!! by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    What does the Constitution have to do with anything? The Constitution is no longer in effect in America.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  36. Re:So... just to to make sure: by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 1

    "That works only until the judge finds out t ..."

    I concede your point that the world is full of self-righteous scumbags who hide behind a veil of common ignorance while wearing silly robes.

    --
    Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
  37. Re:So... just to to make sure: by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    By default. If I was a minor, my parents would have had the duty to ensure I cannot access a page I am not supposed to access.

    Don't shift the burden of raising your kids on society. It's YOUR job. Not mine.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  38. They still call cannabis a narcotic ? by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    When is the medical community going to grow some balls and start having a little integrity ?

  39. Re:COLORADO!! by frovingslosh · · Score: 1

    Boy, easy to see that you are a user.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  40. Re:So... just to to make sure: by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    Unfortunately the entry barrier to parenthood is very low (and in fact, even lower for the stupid) and there are no technical solutions to bad parents so either we only allow intelligent and responsible people to breed or, as a society, we'll have to accept a part of this burden.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  41. Re:So... just to to make sure: by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Sorry, but no. I am in no way willing to surrender my freedoms because OTHERS cannot be bothered to take care of their offspring. So your kids will read how to grow weed, this is YOUR problem. Not mine. And if you do not want them to do so, it is YOUR duty to block those pages. Not mine.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  42. Re:So... just to to make sure: by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

    We'll talk when you get older and assaulted and robbed by the very same low-life kids you've insisted only they parents should raise, not the society as well.
    If children are abandoned, they grow up criminals.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap