cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/26423177
cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/28167168
Muslim here can confirm this is wrong
Summary by brave leo :
- Pakistan’s top advisory body on religious affairs, the Council of Islamic Ideology, declared that using virtual private networks (VPNs) to access blocked content is against Islamic law.
- The government is pushing users to register VPNs with the state’s media regulator, ostensibly to enhance cybersecurity and fight terrorism, but critics say it increases online surveillance and curbs freedom of expression.
- The government claims VPNs are being used to access “immoral and porn websites” and to facilitate “violent activities and financial transactions” by terrorists.
- Opponents of the restrictions say the increased push to control online activities is aimed at curbing criticism of the Pakistani military.
- The government has announced a “streamlined” VPN registration process, but experts say it allows authorities to track online activities and limit privacy.
- The nationwide internet regulation tool acquired from China increases the Pakistani state’s capability to monitor communications, raising concerns about data breaches and online security.
the answer is… it’s subjective, you just make up your own mind, and justify it with : it’s a necessity, may Allah forgive me 🥺👉👈
The answer is when you are in a death situation.
No wonder, though. It seems like you don’t even intend to learn facts about the religion you’ll believe in.
secondly, I have trouble talking to people who start discussions with personal attacks, let alone teaching them a thing or two
Then stop talking. Are you looking for trouble, clown?
edit: too bad, he chickened out of discussion.
how and when you know it’s a necessity
I did the math actually. And it seems like mass surveillance will only be justified if homicide rates are higher than 20% ( if 1 out of 5 people die in murder ). And only if surveillance actually stops all the crime ( which it doesn’t ) and only if there is nothing less problematic that could be used instead ( which there are plenty techniques, like normal regular investigation, where you ask people around on their own terms ). Basically the math says it isn’t justified by an apocalyptic margin.
Oh, Are you the same Blender Dumbass 2.0 ?
And only if surveillance actually stops all the crime ( which it doesn’t )
When mass surveillance works, you lose your rights, and when it doesn’t work as intended ( which as the government says to protect you from terrorists ), it gets things wrong and it can be too damaging, like when Google flagged a man who sent his child’s photos to a doctor, or when Facial recognition system gets the wrong person, or when a bank algorithm locks someone of their own account due to suspicious activity… etc
So we’re damned when it works and we’re damned when it doesn’t.
Edit: how can I do the math? Do you have any links…
how can I do the math? Do you have any links…
I documented the math I did on this article: https://blenderdumbass.org/articles/Surveillance_Harms_1000_Times_More_Than_It_Helps.md
Are you the same Blender Dumbass 2.0 ?
I am the same blenderdumbass as in odysee.com/@blenderdumbass:f and as in blenderdumbass.org
lmao, try stop me
The title is (kind of) clickbait. It’s actually just been ruled that using a VPN to access blocked content is against Sharia law. But fuck if that headline isn’t funny
