Telegram - leave can not be blocked
The Internet shook the desire of a certain Alexander Zharov, the head of Roskomnadzor, to block the popular Telegram messenger. Experts think and argue: is it possible? Will it happen? Why is this? And so on.
I want to throw on this fan one more little thought, which can be briefly summarized to the question: “Who substituted Alexander Zharov?”
Why do I think that Zharov was framed? Oh well. Maybe he realizes what he does and all the consequences. Although, in this case, everything is much worse. For him as well. I prefer to think that he is an “innocent victim” - after all, I am not familiar with him and do not want to slander.
')
So let's go in order.
1. Zharov sent Durov a request to provide data for entering Telegram into the register of information dissemination organizers.
2. Durov ignored the requirement.
3. The law requires a telegram to block.
4. Zharov says he will block Telegram in a few days.
Question: what can Zharov do here? Probably something can. But essentially - he can not. All that he can - to pull time. In the best case, he will say that he does not have the technical ability to block Telegram and will not do that.
This is a good way. But he has little promise. In the end, can not heat, can someone else. Have pity on Zharov. He is the head of a structure that does not have the ability to choose whether to comply with the laws or not. It's like getting into a car without brakes. All that you can do is to steer between the obstacles intensively and pray that the gas will end as soon as possible.
In this sense, the question is different. Why was this shahid-mobile ever created and launched precisely along this trajectory? Yes, I think that Zharov in this case is a voluntary or involuntary IT-shahid. And Roskomnadzor is a device that will explode, causing maximum damage ... to the state itself and to no one else.
I will explain my thought. If the Telegram is blocked, there will be no end of the world. This will only cause mild irritation among several million users of the messenger. Less than a year before the election. Who will users blame for this? Zharova? Who will remember about him? They will blame someone larger and well-known. The one who is responsible for the actions of all downstream.
It would seem, why the state needs to shoot himself in the knee? But let me! In 1985-1991 (the range can be expanded) this has already happened, and it was called “Perestroika”. I will not go into details, but the face is clearly similar to the plot, when statesmen, voluntarily or involuntarily, understanding or not, work for the self-destruction of the system in which they themselves work.
But if this action harms the system, then why does the system do it? The only answer I see is that part of the system wants to dismantle another part of the system. And to this end, trying to warm up the protest movement.
In other words, it is quite possible that Roskomnadzor is just a ram that they want to hurt as many people as possible. With that, as much as possible suitable under a certain social portrait. Which one? Imagine yourself. Who would be bad for blocking telegrams, banning anonymizers, vpn, who most began to worry about the recent case of blocking a google.ru domain? I do not know what you have imagined, but it seems to me that these are people who are well suited to somehow connect them to the protests in one form or another. I remind you that less than a year is left before the presidential election.
If I am right (I don’t want anything and I can’t prove it - think for it yourself), that is, a completely understandable recipe for what exactly to do with Telegram blocking. It is necessary for the attacked part of the system to stop the blocking process of Telegram under any pretext that she likes.
The law on the prohibition of anonymizers and other means of circumventing blocking should not also come into force. In general, if this attacked part of the system wants to survive - it should take a closer look at what is happening in the field of IT regulation. Anyone who stops this shahid mobile will get some support points and will not allow some people to stir up protest moods in this area.
Those who are at least a little versed in the technological part of what is happening - understand that the word "terrorism" in this case can be applied as soon as possible to Roskomnadzor itself, and not to Telegram. Telegram is not about those real terrorists who actually carry out the attacks. It's not about the attacks. If the whole question came down only to the fact that terrorists use messengers, then it would be necessary to ban the alphabet - it is precisely those that are used to transmit their messages. We will win the alphabet - we will win terrorism!
Ridiculous. But in the place of some people, I would think about what is happening here at all and why do they need all this tuning in the zoo?
I want to throw on this fan one more little thought, which can be briefly summarized to the question: “Who substituted Alexander Zharov?”
Why do I think that Zharov was framed? Oh well. Maybe he realizes what he does and all the consequences. Although, in this case, everything is much worse. For him as well. I prefer to think that he is an “innocent victim” - after all, I am not familiar with him and do not want to slander.
')
So let's go in order.
1. Zharov sent Durov a request to provide data for entering Telegram into the register of information dissemination organizers.
2. Durov ignored the requirement.
3. The law requires a telegram to block.
4. Zharov says he will block Telegram in a few days.
Question: what can Zharov do here? Probably something can. But essentially - he can not. All that he can - to pull time. In the best case, he will say that he does not have the technical ability to block Telegram and will not do that.
This is a good way. But he has little promise. In the end, can not heat, can someone else. Have pity on Zharov. He is the head of a structure that does not have the ability to choose whether to comply with the laws or not. It's like getting into a car without brakes. All that you can do is to steer between the obstacles intensively and pray that the gas will end as soon as possible.
In this sense, the question is different. Why was this shahid-mobile ever created and launched precisely along this trajectory? Yes, I think that Zharov in this case is a voluntary or involuntary IT-shahid. And Roskomnadzor is a device that will explode, causing maximum damage ... to the state itself and to no one else.
I will explain my thought. If the Telegram is blocked, there will be no end of the world. This will only cause mild irritation among several million users of the messenger. Less than a year before the election. Who will users blame for this? Zharova? Who will remember about him? They will blame someone larger and well-known. The one who is responsible for the actions of all downstream.
It would seem, why the state needs to shoot himself in the knee? But let me! In 1985-1991 (the range can be expanded) this has already happened, and it was called “Perestroika”. I will not go into details, but the face is clearly similar to the plot, when statesmen, voluntarily or involuntarily, understanding or not, work for the self-destruction of the system in which they themselves work.
But if this action harms the system, then why does the system do it? The only answer I see is that part of the system wants to dismantle another part of the system. And to this end, trying to warm up the protest movement.
In other words, it is quite possible that Roskomnadzor is just a ram that they want to hurt as many people as possible. With that, as much as possible suitable under a certain social portrait. Which one? Imagine yourself. Who would be bad for blocking telegrams, banning anonymizers, vpn, who most began to worry about the recent case of blocking a google.ru domain? I do not know what you have imagined, but it seems to me that these are people who are well suited to somehow connect them to the protests in one form or another. I remind you that less than a year is left before the presidential election.
If I am right (I don’t want anything and I can’t prove it - think for it yourself), that is, a completely understandable recipe for what exactly to do with Telegram blocking. It is necessary for the attacked part of the system to stop the blocking process of Telegram under any pretext that she likes.
The law on the prohibition of anonymizers and other means of circumventing blocking should not also come into force. In general, if this attacked part of the system wants to survive - it should take a closer look at what is happening in the field of IT regulation. Anyone who stops this shahid mobile will get some support points and will not allow some people to stir up protest moods in this area.
Those who are at least a little versed in the technological part of what is happening - understand that the word "terrorism" in this case can be applied as soon as possible to Roskomnadzor itself, and not to Telegram. Telegram is not about those real terrorists who actually carry out the attacks. It's not about the attacks. If the whole question came down only to the fact that terrorists use messengers, then it would be necessary to ban the alphabet - it is precisely those that are used to transmit their messages. We will win the alphabet - we will win terrorism!
Ridiculous. But in the place of some people, I would think about what is happening here at all and why do they need all this tuning in the zoo?
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/356192/
All Articles