> It's the final repercussion following repeated attempts by Musk/X to ignore demands from the Brazilian legal system which were made in accordance with Brazilian law as written by congresspeople duly elected by the Brazilian people.
The Brazilian constitution is clear, you can read it here, article 5 IX:
The actions taken by Alexandre de Moraes are certainly not in accordance with Brazilian law, since the constitution sits above everything else.
> The judge didn't say "put a local representative here or we close you down".
That is literally what happened - the disagreement with X originated with secret censorship orders. However, the order that ultimately blocked X for Brazilian users was based on the issue of having a local representative - or so they stated. X got rid of their local representative because of the threats issued by Alexandre de Moraes to fine and jail the representative and other staff, in addition to going after their personal financial assets.
Virtually all news articles say the final shutdown was due to the lack of a representative, and you can read it in an example article right here:
By the way, this tactic of pointing at some arbitrary rule, like needing a local representative, as a justification for some drastic action, is exactly the tactic that has been deployed in authoritarian settings in recent history - for example in the Soviet Union.
> Note X isn't being banned for allowing free speech.
That is literally what this entire issue is about. You can read the text of the order sent to X from Alexandre de Moraes here:
The order is to secretly shut down accounts belonging to various people - which is the dictionary definition of censorship. Refusing this order, which is unconstitutional and illegal under Brazilian law, is what this entire controversy is about.
> I'm defending the rule of law while you keep sinking into the QAnon bias projecting hurr durr my freedoms into other countries when you don't really know what you're yapping about
For the second time, read the HN guidelines and respect the type of interaction that makes Hacker News worth reading. Ad hominem attacks like this not only don’t help investigate the issue, but they also just have no place here:
The Brazilian constitution is clear, you can read it here, article 5 IX:
https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Brazil_2017
The actions taken by Alexandre de Moraes are certainly not in accordance with Brazilian law, since the constitution sits above everything else.
> The judge didn't say "put a local representative here or we close you down".
That is literally what happened - the disagreement with X originated with secret censorship orders. However, the order that ultimately blocked X for Brazilian users was based on the issue of having a local representative - or so they stated. X got rid of their local representative because of the threats issued by Alexandre de Moraes to fine and jail the representative and other staff, in addition to going after their personal financial assets.
Virtually all news articles say the final shutdown was due to the lack of a representative, and you can read it in an example article right here:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brazil-x-platform-suspended-elo...
By the way, this tactic of pointing at some arbitrary rule, like needing a local representative, as a justification for some drastic action, is exactly the tactic that has been deployed in authoritarian settings in recent history - for example in the Soviet Union.
> Note X isn't being banned for allowing free speech.
That is literally what this entire issue is about. You can read the text of the order sent to X from Alexandre de Moraes here:
https://x.com/AlexandreFiles/status/1829979981130416479
The order is to secretly shut down accounts belonging to various people - which is the dictionary definition of censorship. Refusing this order, which is unconstitutional and illegal under Brazilian law, is what this entire controversy is about.
> I'm defending the rule of law while you keep sinking into the QAnon bias projecting hurr durr my freedoms into other countries when you don't really know what you're yapping about
For the second time, read the HN guidelines and respect the type of interaction that makes Hacker News worth reading. Ad hominem attacks like this not only don’t help investigate the issue, but they also just have no place here:
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html