Top
Best
New

Posted by siev 21 hours ago

Iran's internet blackout may become permanent, with access for elites only(restofworld.org)
382 points | 323 comments
mahdi7d1 19 hours ago|
I've been moderately happy this morning to find out I can open hackernews. Also Gmail is working. After attempting to get bridges using email and configuring an dozen of them I got 100% connection but then it disconnected without me being able to connect to anything. I would assume some sort of tunneling must be possible cause the services available are varied and not limited to a few websites (We only had access to Google Search for about a week and nothing before that) now even Nintendo Store opened to my complete surprise.
_ink_ 17 hours ago||
I there anything the outside world can do? Like are the people relying on https://snowflake.torproject.org/ and adding bandwidth there actually makes a difference?
bfm 12 hours ago|||
We can help resurrect Murmur via https://github.com/De-Novo-Group/rangzen-revival

Here’s Tamir’s call for action https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7419994...

mohsen1 17 hours ago||||
Unfortunately if it's public the government can also see it and block it :(
direwolf20 14 hours ago||
Snowflake aims to make every IP address a Tor bridge. It hides Tor traffic inside something very similar to a video call, which works in a browser behind NAT.
hopelite 15 hours ago|||
[flagged]
mohsen1 12 hours ago||
You and your friends at Islamic Republic would do exactly what Israel has done in Gaza, if necessary. Killing thousands in less than 2 days is just a sign of nature of Islamic Republic. If necessary they would use chemical weapons against people of Iran.
hopelite 12 hours ago||
[dead]
SturgeonsLaw 17 hours ago|||
Is there anything people outside Iran can spin up in order to get more routes out?
bananasandrice 13 hours ago|||
[flagged]
gambutin 17 hours ago||
Glad to see you here.

I’m almost afraid to ask but how are you and everyone else?

mahdi7d1 15 hours ago||
I use this same username everywhere and it's tied to my identity so let me keep it brief. I live in a small town and you wouldn't get much protesting or any political activity in those.

On the other hand, I'm currently serving in the police force (Which all able bodied men of age have to do and serve in one of the three armed forces of my country) and the bigger question since the start of the protests has been "What to do if I was put in a position against people?"

Thankfully that hasn't happened yet but still there is a feeling of being stuck between a rock and a hard place.

mabedan 13 hours ago|||
Brother, maybe make a new username...
marbli2 12 hours ago||||
Logged in just to say, 100% with the other person's comment for you to make a new username... why even risk having something so personally identifiable on the internet especially in the country you live in. I don't and I live in the United States...
thomassmith65 15 hours ago|||
That is a nightmare. Hopefully events play out such that you can stay true to your conscience.
egorfine 12 hours ago||
I don't see any drawbacks on this. Recent protests demonstrated that:

a) protests can and will be crushed by the government forces and people will be ultimately defeated;

b) people have no means to force government to enable back freedoms;

c) control is much easier with no internet available.

Russia is on the same path by providing white-list only internet access "during Ukrainian attacks" and a bit longer every time until ultimately internet will become whitelist only.

Also as we have seen specifically in russia, there is no shortage of senior software developers and network engineers truly putting in their best work to block VPNs better and deeper.

Thus Iran's (and russia's) internet blackout may indeed become permanent.

Update: obviously in this comment I am looking at this from the standpoint of an oppressive government.

gryfft 12 hours ago||
Do you have a different definition of 'drawback' than I do?
egorfine 12 hours ago|||
I'm speaking from the standpoint of an oppressive government. Freedom of internet access is something that they would rather never allow.
Telaneo 12 hours ago||||
They presumably mean drawback from the government's perspective. For the average citizen it obviously sucks.
ktallett 12 hours ago|||
As in the total opposite meaning?
AnimalMuppet 12 hours ago||
Drawbacks are that your population loses contact with progress. Your people become less skilled for the modern world. That's fine if you want a country of agrarian peasants or factory-working drones, but it cripples your country if it's in a technological arms race.

I mean, North Korea does manage to produce rockets and nuclear warheads. They aren't exporting technology, though.

egorfine 11 hours ago||
> your population loses contact with progress

This is only a drawback if you think about your country's future.

Which oppressive regimes do not.

Thus it is an advantage, not a drawback.

AnimalMuppet 9 hours ago||
Yes and no. Take someone like Putin. He wants to be an oppressive regime, but also he wants Russia to be militarily strong. Well, militarily strong is highly tied to technological progress these days. He can force his people into human wave attacks. And that is dangerous enough to perhaps take Ukraine. It's a different story if he actually attacks NATO, though.
egorfine 9 hours ago||
Oh no worries.

Those who are commuting daily to lay down flight paths for russian missiles to kill Ukrainians - those have unrestricted internet access.

weikju 21 hours ago||
… while every other country waits to see how it goes while drafting plans to emulate this
dragonelite 13 hours ago||
The global cybersphere will split up, the west and other parties have shown they will use social media networks to organize regime change and take over legitimate protests.

Especially now that China is taking an ever increasing share of the global information streams. Given the increased panicked the US had about tiktok. Showing the result of the western sponsored genocide in Gaza. They had to enforce ownership handover of tiktok US to a group of US based entities.

So i wouldn't be surprised US internet sphere will shrink over time now that China can go on the offensive in the cyber-realm.. The components are already in place just pull the switch so cloudflare has to regulate who gets in and who gets out.

jimbohn 12 hours ago|||
When it comes to the internet, it seems to me that "the other parties" here carries a lot of weight when it comes to disinfo, polarizing propaganda, etc.
throw310822 10 hours ago||
Why, do you think that the US, where all the giant social network companies are based, isn't doing this on a massive scale, much larger than anything Russia or Iran (and probably China for now) could ever hope to do?
sofixa 10 hours ago||
Because if it did, we'd know about it. If we can get researches from Russia to expose their country's nefarious dealings, at the threat of death, we could easily get French, or German, or Canadian, or British, or American, or Czech researchers or whistleblowers exposing American propaganda campaigns.

Hell, look at Twitter/X. It got acquired by a mental guy who was screaming about government propaganda and censorship (while doing Nazi salutes). Do you really think that if there was any government mandate to do anything like what the Russians are doing, he wouldn't have exposed it as "SEE, I TOLD YOU BIG GUBIMNT BAD!!" ?

sofixa 10 hours ago|||
< The global cybersphere will split up, the west and other parties have shown they will use social media networks to organize regime change and take over legitimate protests.

It's interesting you focus on "the west" when we have solid proof about e.g. Russian interference in many an election and protest via social media. From paid propagandist (e.g. Tim Pool) to the Internet Research Agency. The only factual information we have about anything remotely similar from "the west" was that research about Facebook activity in the Central African Republic being roughly 40/40/20 split between Russians, French, and actual locals. And even that isn't comparable because the French online campaign was mostly combatting Russian disinformation propaganda, not trying to bring about a coup or stoking tensions to get to a civil war.

> Showing the result of the western sponsored genocide in Gaza

The genocide in Gaza is not "sponsored" by the "west". US, maybe.

lstodd 8 hours ago||
> The genocide in Gaza is not "sponsored" by the "west". US, maybe.

Well, Hamas was for decades sponsored by entire West via UNRWA while their "from the river to the sea" slogan is as clearly expressed intent to commit genocide as one can wish for.

spwa4 8 hours ago||
I think you mean sponsored by the UN, whose largest voting block is the "Organization of Islamic countries" and whose second largest voting block is the "Non-Aligned movement" (that really means aligned with Moscow). There's overlap, for example, Iran is in both camps (fitting since it's a theocracy and both the Iranian government and the parent organization of Hamas, the muslim brotherhood, was greatly grown and sponsored by/with the help of the KGB during the cold war. Perhaps also relevant: the PA's original leader, Yasser Arafat El-Masri (translates to: The wise Egyptian) was an Egyptian KGB spy and was sponsored by Moscow with at least a billion dollars)
dybber 21 hours ago|||
That would really boost productivity! Not gonna happen.
direwolf20 14 hours ago||
Which country cares about productivity, besides China?
ajsnigrutin 21 hours ago||
I mean... EU already blocks eg. some russian sites (some countries more effectively than others)... plus all the chat control pressures every year.

Spain is blocking whole blocks of internet during football matches.

UK is making you "show your ID card" to jerk off.

But every such country likes pointing fingers at others, "hey, our censorship is not bad, they have more of it!".

edit: considering the downvotes, HN is not bothered by our censorship either

walletdrainer 21 hours ago|||
> UK is making you "show your ID card" to jerk off.

There are no ID cards in the UK, so you actually have to get a special jerking off loicense.

isoprophlex 18 hours ago|||
I remember giggling at those "oi you got a loicense for that m8??!" memes. Funny, maybe, but not to be taken seriously.

Fast forward less than ten years, and here we are.

Al-Khwarizmi 18 hours ago||
One of my favorite Monty Python sketches, the fish license: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1lXyup0De7Q
yard2010 17 hours ago||
Did Kemal Ataturk really have a full menagerie all named abdul?
nicoburns 13 hours ago||||
There are passports and driving licenses which are the de facto forms of ID in the UK (there are technically other valid forms of ID for at least some purposes, but almost nobody uses them). ~85% of UK residents have a passport.
walletdrainer 7 hours ago||
Yes, but luckily the people who don’t fly or drive can now show their jerking-off loicense while buying alcohol at whole foods.
bluescrn 14 hours ago||||
> There are no ID cards in the UK

Not physical cards, but a digital ID system is on the way :(

traceroute66 12 hours ago||
> Not physical cards, but a digital ID system is on the way :(

No there isn't : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3385zrrx73o

avhception 17 hours ago||||
I remember a popular "greentext" specifically about this...
chairmansteve 15 hours ago||||
You've got to pass a test first.
lifestyleguru 20 hours ago|||
What if someone is not a certified wanker?
reactordev 20 hours ago||
Head down to your local Tory office and prove it.
keysersoze33 20 hours ago|||
If all else fails, ask for BJ
pixelpoet 14 hours ago||
They referred me to the BBC
reactordev 11 hours ago||
Old FM department or Business Development & Social Management?
jamesbelchamber 18 hours ago|||
The wanker licensing board defected to Reform last week
perihelions 16 hours ago||||
An even more apt analogy is France in New Caledonia. Back in 2024, the French territorial government used an anti-terrorism law to enforce DNS blocks in that overseas territory, for the express purpose of suppressing political protests (by New Caledonians angry at the French mainland government).

> "Philippe Gomes, the former president of New Caledonia's government, told POLITICO the decision aimed to stop protesters from "organizing reunions and protests" through the app."

[0] https://www.politico.eu/article/french-tiktok-ban-new-caledo...

This is the only example I'm aware of (are there others?) of a Western government effecting internet censorship to suppress protests. (Though the article also mentions Macron considering (but rejecting) the same idea in France, to suppress protests following a police shooting. See also[1])

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36599726 ("Macron floats social media cuts during riots", 105 comments)

edit: There was also an incident in San Francisco way back in 2011,

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2879546 ("San Francisco Subway Muzzles Cell Service During Protest", 113 comments)

sofixa 10 hours ago||
> for the express purpose of suppressing political protests (by New Caledonians angry at the French mainland government).

No, to stop the spread of targeted disinformation by foreign actors stoking those protests to turn into riots. (and if you need any proof, check out the protestors with Azeri flags, in New Caledonia. Azerbaijan's tinpot dictator hates France because France supported Armenia, so he's been trying various ways to undermine France because he's that fragile: https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/17/new-ca... )

traceroute66 12 hours ago||||
> UK is making you "show your ID card" to jerk off.

If you are going to post shit like that, at least get your fucking facts right.

Namely that you are three weeks out of date sushine.

The idea has been dropped: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3385zrrx73o

acka 11 hours ago||
Reading comprehension, my friend.

The article you linked to is about the dropped plan to require ID for permission to work in the UK.

The parent commenter is referring to age verification for accessing adult content using "highly effective age-assurance systems" (such as photo ID cards, biometrics, etc.) under the Online Safety Act 2023, which is still very much in effect.

traceroute66 11 hours ago||
> under the Online Safety Act 2023, which is still very much in effect.

To which I say, the people of the UK are not stupid and know what a VPN is.

Its not rocket-science to bypass the ID check requirement.

ajsnigrutin 7 hours ago||
First you're going to insult me, call me a sunshine, and defend what the UK government is doing, because there's currently a way to bypass a restriction that shouldn't exist implemented this way in the first place?

So, by your logic, russian censorship of media is ok too, just use a vpn, right? Chinese firewall? Just use a VPN! Turkey social media blackouts? VPN!

expedition32 12 hours ago||||
The difference is that people in my country get to vote. A lot.

In the Netherlands GOVERNMENT=THE PEOPLE to a rather problematic degree (if only you knew how bad things really are).

If you want to start an argument "the Netherlands is just like Iran" I challenge it with 20 political parties in Parliament. Including a pro Kremlin party lol.

baxtr 13 hours ago||||
Downvotes might happen because your comment reads one-sided.

What about Russia blocking sites?

As of late 2025 and early 2026, Russia has blocked numerous foreign communication, social media, and information services, restricting platforms like WhatsApp, Telegram (partially), Signal, Viber, FaceTime, Snapchat, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. Many independent news, VPN services, and foreign websites (e.g., Chess.com) are also inaccessible

ajsnigrutin 13 hours ago||
But that's my point exactly.... do you consider this to be a good thing? Should EU behave the same as russia or iran? Should those two countries be an "excuse" for us to do it too (hey! russia does it too!)? Should the police in eg. Brussles start shooting at protesting farmers and say "what about iran, they're killing their protesters too!"?

If we consider russia bad for doing those blocks above, then we should consider EU being bad when they do it for us.

baxtr 10 hours ago||
Then it's a misunderstanding and I had misread your original comment.

Of course we should not ban anything in the West.

buzzerbetrayed 21 hours ago||||
Why during football matches?
ajsnigrutin 21 hours ago||
So people wouldn't stream the games ilegally... the private entity that owns the rights to broadcasting the games can arbitrarily ban whole subnets.

the end result is well... not good:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45323856

sigmar 20 hours ago||
A company using legal action to protect their IP rights is so different from a theocratic dictatorship shutting down the entire Internet to prevent their overthrow. Perhaps you don't follow the news about Iran but these comments are incredibly daft.
freetanga 19 hours ago|||
The problem itself is not IP protection…. They tried that, and were always chasing behind - servers changed week after week, ban after ban.

So, misteriously (suspicions of bribery abound) now they block full blocks of internet preventively, bringing down innocent and paying customers with them. From Law Enforcement to privatized Minority Report.

Thats what people dislike. If you are a private entity and loose money to piracy, use the legal framework to solve it. Don’t override it with lobbying

lukan 17 hours ago||||
You don't see a problem if private companies get the right to decide who to block from the internet, without any process?
direwolf20 14 hours ago||
That's freedom of market. You need to sue your ISP for contract breach, they said they'd provide internet access and didn't.
lukan 13 hours ago|||
That market is not really free, but government regulated and mandated and the government says they are fine to do this (as far as I know, I do not live in spain).
marrs 12 hours ago|||
If you have to sue your provider just to get a normal service then society has already failed. I can only imagine you're an American for litigation to be your go-to solution.
direwolf20 12 hours ago||
I rarely encounter a company that doesn't scam me to the maximum extent it thinks it can get away with. That extent is determined by how many customers sue them.
ajsnigrutin 20 hours ago||||
But that's even worse... Iran is a stuck up country with huge political issues, internal and external pressures, outside countries attacking it while internally they're at the cusp of a civil war. Of course they'll shut down the internet, what else do you expect them to do? It's not like they have many options, nor the government trying to stay in power and crush a coup, even if that means blocking the internet, nor the people who are protesting against it and risking their lives.

But EU countries should be a bastion of freedom, free speech, free access to information, democracy, human rights, rights to this, rights to that... Why do we, the EU countries have to use the same playbook? Yes, banning the whole internet is in one way worse and in other easier, than just banning a list of sites where people can find a way around it, but again, the difference is just in the quantity, the censorship factor is the same. The government gets scared people will see some other propaganda from the other side, and censors it... and even that is done very selectively (daily mail is still accessible from over here, so are fox news and cnn)

With spain it's even worse, because it's not even the government doing it, but the government giving the right of censorship to a private company which clearly abuses that right and the government tolerates this... no court orders, no judges, no way to complain, no fair use, no nothing, a private company decides and the government gives them a blank stamped paper to aprove that.

Yes, i know iran has it much worse, but there's nothing we can do about it here, assuming the internet is banned for iranians and they can't read this or comment here. But EU is doing the same, and we've been tolerating it for years... a site here, a site there,... not everything, but censorship is still censorship, no matter how many sites are censored, and there are people from EU here that should argue against censorship, even if it's just a few sites and not all of them.

squidbeak 14 hours ago||
> It's not like they have many options, nor the government trying to stay in power and crush a coup [..]

You are joking: a 'coup'? The protest movement was so large, the government's attempt to crush it killed 30,000 people in 48 hours.

https://time.com/7357635/more-than-30000-killed-in-iran-say-...

FilosofumRex 20 hours ago|||
Iran is not a dictatorship, but a republic with thousands of MPs since 1905 and 8 elected presidents since 1979. It subsidize basic needs of its poorer citizens, such as fuel, bread, housing, education and healthcare.

Perhaps, you prefer Arabia, UAE or Israel's internet and find it more to your liking

breppp 19 hours ago|||
A republic with a supreme religious leader who actually decides everything, that fakes elections and has a council of religious leaders that can disqualify any candidate

that's without even talking about killing 30,000-40,000 citizens for wanting their rights

> It subsidize basic needs of its poorer citizens, such as fuel, bread, housing, education and healthcare.

I'd start with supplying basic needs like water and electricity.

The actual subsidizing is for the IRGC which steals whatever they can get their hands on so they can be counted on to mass slaughter the people

21asdffdsa12 13 hours ago|||
Do not forget funding widespread proxxy wars and terrorism in the region, although that game has many players: Qatar, UAE, Turkey, Egypt..
FilosofumRex 5 hours ago||
[flagged]
FilosofumRex 5 hours ago|||
Subsidies are enacted and approved by Parliament and enshrined in the law. IRGC has nothing to do with approval or distribution of subsidies.
noduerme 16 hours ago||||
>> Arabia, UAE or Israel's internet

You mean the internet?

FilosofumRex 5 hours ago||
haha, Iranians are lot smarter than you - they know the real internet https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2022/09/security-vuln...
siev 10 hours ago||||
> It subsidize basic needs of its poorer citizens, such as fuel, bread, housing, education and healthcare.

Hold on, am I living in the wrong Iran?

FilosofumRex 5 hours ago||
You don't live in Iran and are a CIA/Mossad agent too scared to go back like the rest of monarchists
orwin 17 hours ago||||
Khomenei is called the "supreme leader" since 89. His predecessor betrayed his allies by wording a referendum for the abolition of the monarchy weirdly, making it instead about the installation of a theocracy.

(i don't want to make it overly political, but once again the historical materialist offshots of the revolutionary groups are the only ones who understood the betrayal and called a boycott of this referendum. Please listen to marxists when they're in a coup, they are so used to betrayal they'll see it comming)

hagbard_c 16 hours ago||
It was the same "Marxists" who helped Khomeini gain power so by all means observe Marxists but only to understand where they are trying to lead society so you can be ready to limit the amount of damage they'll do. Lenin is supposed to have called these people 'useful idiots', useful to create societal upheaval because they are so easy to lead and eager to follow but for that same reason they should be neutralised once the Party has gained power. Lenin and Stalin tended to just kill them or sent them into the GULAG, Mao sent them to the countryside, Khomeini followed Lenin and Stalin in getting rid of the Marxist students who helped push the revolution.
orwin 3 hours ago||
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. They were part of the coalition against the Shah, which included Islamists, Democrats and Marxists. Since Marxists are used to be betrayed, it's basically a feature at this point, they were the ones to understand where the betrayal would come from. If the democrats did follow and boycotted the referendum too, maybe Iran wouldn't have a supreme leader and have a democracy. So if you're part of a coalition with Marxists, listen to their paranoia once it's done.
hagbard_c 17 hours ago||||
Iran is a democratic republic just like the 'democratic peoples republic' of North Korea is, i.e. not at all. It is remarkable how often entities which use the term 'democratic' do not live up to the concept it refers to
direwolf20 14 hours ago|||
The rule is that the more times "people" appears in a country's name, the less free it is. The DPRK has it three times - in Greek, English, and Latin.
FilosofumRex 5 hours ago|||
Iran is not called a democratic republic but an Islamic Republic and at that it is the only one of its kind in all of Middle East. Like all republics holds regular elections and referendums. The fact that you don't like the results does not make it a dictatorship
ThePowerOfFuet 19 hours ago|||
>Iran is not a dictatorship

lmao

ajjahs 15 hours ago||||
[dead]
bananasandrice 13 hours ago||||
[flagged]
wartywhoa23 18 hours ago||||
[flagged]
wewxjfq 17 hours ago||
Your upvotes are issued by sheep and wolf in sheep's clothing telling you to not censor propaganda from a country that's been waging war against you.
31337Logic 21 hours ago||||
Yeah, you're right. It's totally fair to compare how the EU treats its people to how Iran is treating its people right now. Good job. :-/
breppp 19 hours ago|||
it's a very weird kind of propaganda I see a lot of lately.

Everything is the same and comparable never mind how hyperbolic. Doubt it? be showered with cherry picked micro facts that on the surface are similar.

This rests on the fact that in order to establish a big picture you have to take small facts and agree on the big picture, and that leap from small and verifiable to large and analytic is the place you can inject faith and emotion

Nursie 19 hours ago||
This seems to happen a lot.

The UK is doing some shitty stuff and a man was arrested for wearing a “Plasticine Action” t-shirt a few weeks ago, “Palestine Action” being a proscribed group in the UK, and showing support being an offence. When the mistake was realised he was released after a few hours with an apology.

These things are objectively terrible, shouldn’t be happening. The UK government is under popular and legal pressure to un-proscribe the group as hundreds (thousands?) have been arrested and charged.

But it is not the same as someone being ‘disappeared’ in South American dictatorships, where they would be taken and denied process for years if not killed outright. Yet people here drew that comparison. He was arrested for inconvenient speech! It’s the same! And then I came under fire for defending the actions of the UK, having done nothing of the sort.

It’s really weird to watch.

netsharc 15 hours ago|||
But defending the arrest of the man with "Plasticine Action" t-shirt as a mistake (only realized after a "few" hours, god damn!), is god damn ridiculous.

About 2 decades ago I read an article about how bureucracies don't even allow for humor any more, e.g. even clearly joking about having a bomb in the airport is now taboo. Something about rigid inhumane inflexible rules, in my vague memory of that article.

Where airport security has to examine babies for terrorist motives, because it's written in the rules, fuck human reasoning!

Heh in my own estimation arresting supporters of Palestine Action for peacefully protesting is already too close to Iranian autocracy ideal and too far from a "democratic country" ideal which the UK used to be...

Nursie 15 hours ago||
Who’s defending it?

It’s awful that they’re arresting people with “Palestine Action” t-shirts too. It’s just not the same thing as actually disappearing people.

That's the point of this thread, no? Things can be bad in different ways and to different degrees.

If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and punch you in the gut, that's a pretty shitty thing to do.

If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and cut your throat then bury your body in the forest, I would like to think we can agree that's worse.

ajsnigrutin 7 hours ago||
> If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and punch you in the gut, that's a pretty shitty thing to do.

> If I say I don't like the way you just spoke about my sister and cut your throat then bury your body in the forest, I would like to think we can agree that's worse.

So at what point can we start saying that violence because of words (or shirts) is bad? How much does it have to hurt? Should we act as if you're a good guy, because it was just a punch? Or should we remove you from power and punish you before your punches turn into throat cutting?

10 years ago, getting arrested for wearing a tshirt with some text on it, would be on an iran/north korea level of shitty governments, something that could never happen "at home" (in uk, eu,...)... now it's somehow become "shitty, but not as bad, because in some other land you'd get shot instead," (and similar excuses). How much closer must UK come to iranian levels, before you start seeing the parallels between the behaviour of the two governments?

We were pointing out "the great firewall of china" not so many years ago as a horrible thing, now we have censorship in EU. How many sites must be added to the EU list to become an equivalent of the chinese "firewall"?

This behaviour has to be stopped now, when it's just arrest and excuses, and not after 10 years when people start getting shot for protesting here too.

Nursie 45 minutes ago||
> So at what point can we start saying that violence because of words (or shirts) is bad?

Straight away!

> Should we act as if you're a good guy, because it was just a punch?

No, and nobody is asking you to. In fact this is the whole point, can you not distinguish between those two guys?

Neither one is good. You're not being asked to decide one is 'good' and the other 'bad'. You're not being asked to accept that the more minor one is OK because it's not as bad as the other one.

They can both be bad. But they aren't the same. We don't say "Dude A was upset about someone talking smack about his sister too, so he's just as bad as Dude B". Or at least most people wouldn't. But we also don't say "It's fine to punch someone in the gut because at least he didn't cut the guy's throat". Dude A probably gets a night in the cells and a minor punishment, maybe a conviction for assault and released on parole for time served. B gets serious jail time.

> now it's somehow become "shitty, but not as bad, because in some other land you'd get shot instead," (and similar excuses)

Nobody's making excuses. That's all on you and how you're deciding to ascribe motivations to other posters. Let me say it again - nobody is saying it's OK. I'm not defending anything. If you think I am I'd invite you to re-read the thread.

> How much closer must UK come to iranian levels, before you start seeing the parallels between the behaviour of the two governments?

One is a strict conservative, theocratic dictatorship that is commiting mass murder in order to hold on to power. The other is a troubled democracy that, as far as anyone can tell, isn't murdering its citizens to keep order but has made some pretty fucked up decisions about what constitutes terrorism and a terrorist organisation. Both of these are bad. But they aren't the same, and proclaiming that the UK or the EU are just as bad as Iran or Russia or China provides cover for atrocities IMHO, and is straight out of the propaganda playbook those countries like to put about the place. It also just destroys nuance of discussion when basically anything negative may as well be Hitler.

> 10 years ago, getting arrested for wearing a tshirt

Was something that happened occasionally under varying different laws. It was shit then too.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/oct/11/manchester-man-ja...

And if you'd worn a pro-IRA t-shirt in the 80s/90s, you'd have faced arrest for that as well. Still would in fact. The major change with the Plasticine/Palestine action cases is the classification of a pro-Human Rights, direct-action group as a terrorist organisation. If you'd like to see a list of all the organisations currently classified this way, there's one here - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/proscribed-terror...

stereolambda 15 hours ago||||
I would see it as moving the baseline, which Europe and (more historically) UK was for many people in civil rights area. If we just say that authoritarian countries are still worse, this partly implies that what Western countries are doing is becoming acceptable, as long as it is still "better" or "less bad".

The important point is, if the erosion of civil liberties continues, these governments are losing their high ground. They must stop.

As in the Cold War, I would give an allowance for the West to still be preferable (modulo strict rights record) if they actually muster some sort of power to confront tyranny. But if the rulers only want cheap rhetoric wins, no.

vintermann 14 hours ago||||
It's not literally the same of course. But you should wonder, how much of the difference is due just differences in how much they need to do?

If South American dictatorships could have their way with less blood and less noise, don't you think they would prefer that?

I'm reminded of a tragicomic recent admission from Nate Silver of 538 fame. He said Disney almost never interfered in their editorial process, as if that was a good thing. What that really meant, after all, was that Disney was perfectly willing to interfere in their editorial process, but almost never felt the need to. (As you would expect. I mean, why would Disney care about political polling?)

Could it similarly be that the UK government is perfectly willing to engage in brutal political suppression, but rarely has a need to? In that case maybe people are right to sound the alarm even though we haven't reached South American dictatorship levels yet.

Nursie 14 hours ago||
I mean, given that is hasn't worked and hundreds of people have continued to stand up and be arrested for supporting Palestine Action, I'd say that's a no?

It still stinks through and through of course.

vintermann 14 hours ago||
It hasn't worked in changing policy, or meaningfully changing who's in charge. Currently the government is getting its way with this sufficient level of brutality.

I think it's likely they will get still more scared that they won't, and ramp up the brutality accordingly.

The path forward is clear: Reform gets into power, builds their own paramilitary "immigration enforcement" groups a la ICE, and you get the occasional summary execution in the streets, along with arrests based on UKs unmatched surveillance system.

roenxi 18 hours ago|||
The people complaining probably live in the UK or are related to it somehow. Then it would make sense that they are more worried about authoritarianism in the UK rather than in South America.

And even if the man was wearing a proper "Palestine Action" shirt that'd still be pretty concerning. It is an insane stretch to say that wearing a shirt represents a matter for police action. How far the world has moved on from when the UK could be considered a forward-thinking bastion of liberalism.

Nursie 17 hours ago||
The people complaining were American AFAICT and weren’t worried by either, they were just drawing hyperbolic equivalences between suppression of speech and state orchestrated mass kidnapping and murder.
roenxi 17 hours ago||
If we're talking about the Palestine Action shirt, Israel is defending against accusations [0] that they are genocidal. The police action of the UK seems like it could be pretty easily construed as suppression of speech in support of state orchestrated mass kidnapping and murder on a concerning scale.

Whatever is happening in SA might be as bad, I suppose, but I don't speak Spanish or have any family connection there so I'm not going to look it up. Although if they're genocidal then they should stop too, should that need to be said.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Africa's_genocide_case_a...

Nursie 16 hours ago||
The example given was of a man in a “Plasticine Action” t-shirt, with the poster saying how that man was “disappeared” by the British state when he was briefly arrested and released.

If you’re not aware of the history of people being disappeared by states such as Chile under Pinochet, or more broadly what it means for a state to disappear someone, that’s kinda on you.

Either way these are not equivalent actions.

Yes, it’s suppression of free speech in a chilling manner. I hate it. No, it’s not the same as suppressing that speech by taking someone and holding them in a secret prison for years and/or killing them.

DrScientist 15 hours ago|||
> No, it’s not the same as suppressing that speech by taking someone and holding them in a secret prison for years and/or killing them.

Sure. Though in the UK I give you Julian Assange - 5 years in BellMarsh, mostly in total isolation as if he was some major threat.

vintermann 14 hours ago|||
And one thing Assange used to say over and over again, was that he was inspired by government attempts to suppress WikiLeaks releases, because that was evidence that they feared the information in them could actually change things. This is pretty much also the main thesis of Chomsky, and many other western dissidents (and some others too, e.g. Ai Weiwei): our leaders are as unaccountable and willing to use brutality as any dictatorship, they just have less reason to.
direwolf20 14 hours ago||
Because we already obey them more than Iranians obey Iran.
breppp 8 hours ago||
Call me when the UK government brings the machine guns and starts slaughtering 40k Palestine Action protestors and I promise to agree it's all the same
direwolf20 7 hours ago|||
They don't have to, because British are more obedient than Iranians.
ajsnigrutin 7 hours ago|||
10 years ago, you'd be saying "call me when UK police starts arresting people for wearing a wrong t-shirt".
breppp 7 hours ago||
I'll make it easier for you: wake me up when the UK government slaughters 1% the amount of the protestors the Iranian government just did in two days. 400 protestors shot by machine guns mounted on SUVs in London.

That just might be approaching slippery slope territory to the current Iranian actions.

Currently I believe we are at zero protestors casually shot on the streets of the UK, so I fail to see the equivalency

Nursie 14 hours ago|||
Sure, and his treatment has been awful in so many ways.

I'm honestly not trying to defend any action by any state in this thread, I'm not trying to say that the UK is better than any other state. I'm not trying to make any point at all beyond using a specific example in agreeing with the comments above mine that "Everything is the same and comparable never mind how hyperbolic."

But it seems to be construed as if I am, no matter how much I agree that the actions we're talking about are terrible. People come back and tell me the UK is bad and I should feel bad for defending it. I know right! And if I was I would!

I must admit I find the whole thing very frustrating.

DrScientist 14 hours ago|||
The problem is you have to fight for these things every generation.

It's a mistake to take things like trial by jury, open justice ( not secret courts ), non-arbitrary detention, even regular elections for granted.

I totally agree with you that the UK is not Iran and there is too much hyperbole - but at the same time the current government is trying to criminalise legitimate protest, cancelling elections and trying to remove trial by jury for a substantial set of things ( the ultimate protection against an authoritarian state ).

As an example, it's very telling that the government ensured that in all the Assange legal proceedings it never went before a jury.

The current government creating all these precedents, in the shadow of the prospect of a potential Reform government is something I think we should all be concerned about.

Nursie 13 hours ago||
Tell me about it, that Jury thing in particular was shocking to hear, that they’re considering throwing aside an ancient right in the name of expediency and clearing a backlog, as if it was a minor detail and not the basis of the system of justice.
DrScientist 12 hours ago||
Especially since there is no evidence that it's the presence of juries is the cause of the backlog.

The idea that the state can deprive you of your freedom for a sentence likely to be less than 3 years without the chance to be tried before you peers, is worrying.

Note is was six months before Nov 2024, it's 12 months now and they are looking to extend to 3 years! ( or more - given the word: likely ).

Juries are not an administrative inconvenience or process inefficiency.

The current legal reform seems to be operating on the assumption that the defendent is guilty - rather thana resumption of innocence.

Better to let the guilty to go free, than imprison the innocent.

breppp 8 hours ago|||
and that's exactly how the discussion pattern I was describing above works out

and that's why it is efficient propaganda

roenxi 15 hours ago|||
I mean, you bought up an example of a man being dragged off the streets of the UK for (1) trying to express support for playdough and (2) being suspected of undermining support for genocide.

I have relatives in the UK, right now. And after this conversation I'm now more concerned for them than I was this morning, and I can make some educated guesses about why ol' mate didn't want to talk to you about Pinochet, who Wikipedia suggests died 20 years ago. Sounds like something is going on in the UK right now.

I mean, seriously, I have left-wing family members who might be travelling to the UK this year. Is there some sort of guide to what political t-shirts will get them arrested?

Nursie 15 hours ago||
This feels disingenuous on your part now and is in fact exhibiting the exact problem brought up in the thread.

You’re not being asked to feel better about the UK! If you didn’t know about this stuff and you feel worse about the UK, good, you probably should!

But you are being asked to see a difference in degree between:

  Someone speaks out about human rights abuses and murder sanctioned by the state, and is arrested, then later released with an apology.

  Someone speaks out about human rights abuses and murder sanctioned by the state, and is arrested, their arrest is denied by the state and they turn up several years later in a mass grave.
You’re telling me those are the same thing?

> I mean, seriously, I have left-wing family members who might be travelling to the UK this year. Is there some sort of guide to what political t-shirts will get them arrested?

“Palestine Action” is currently a proscribed organisation. They are proscribed because some of them are alleged to have fucked with some fighter jets and done some other illegal direct action stuff.

So currently it’s illegal to show support for that specific group.

There are open court challenges to the whole situation, and many hundreds of people are awaiting trial for continuing to show support to the group after the proscription. The whole thing is a shitshow.

But you can (AFAICT) support Palestine and Palestinian people as much as you like, you’re just not allowed to wave “Palestine Action” flags or t-shirts around.

ajsnigrutin 21 hours ago|||
I live in EU and I oppose internet cenorship, privacy invasion and many other bad things the governments have been doing for years now.

I can't do anything about iran, i don't live there, neither does anyone else commenting here it seems... but many of us do live in EU, and are bothered by EU doing the same thing as iran, even if it's on a smaller scale (for now). You can't support censorship at home and then act outraged when someone else just implements more of it... even though some do, as long as the censored things are the things they personally don't like.

To be fair, i'm more worried about UK, since it's a "test ground" to see how things work before the bad thing are implemented elsewhere, but either way, in my small country we have a saying, that "people should first sweep infront of their own doorways", and yeah, EU and our censorship is my doorway in this case.

TLDR: if we're bothered by internet censorship, we should first stop at 'at home'.

Flatterer3544 18 hours ago|||
If not for EU there would already be multiple states with privacy invasive systems seen in UK.. We are close of getting there and they keep on trying, but so far the blocking states are enough as majority.

Sure EU has some fkn horrible sides to it, such as the anonymous vote to get big stuff through when a majority should be enough as democracy depicts, but currently 2 states out of all EU states can block the big decisions...

ericmay 14 hours ago|||
> I can't do anything about iran, i don't live there

You also don’t live in the United States, or in Israel or Palestine but folks tend to forget that it seems.

But you can do something anyway which is to be aware of the atrocities committed by Iran’s regime, make sure your government is aware of your opinion, you can protest outside the Iranian embassy in your country, help Iranian dissidents, help Iranians find sneaky ways to get internet access, &c.

I’m not expecting anyone to do those things but I find this “I don’t live there” argument continue to creep up whenever it comes to Iran but it never enters conversation when it comes to specific other countries.

> TLDR: if we're bothered by internet censorship, we should first stop at 'at home'.

Sure but you don’t have to focus on one issue at a time. Honestly resorting Internet access in Iran is probably more important than whatever rules and things the EU is implementing because in Iran people are actually dying and you can always change the EU rules back through democratic processes.

ajsnigrutin 12 hours ago||
But what can you do for iran? I mean... we can type text on forums and sites like this, that no one in iran can see... and in the meantime, EU will push for another chat control, some new "think of the children" thing will happen, suddenly the "show your real-identity ID to watch at porn" will turn into "show your ID to register on reddit".

On the other hand, there are many people from EU here who need to hear it, that EU is doing the same as iran... censoring websites and more (IDs, chat control,...). Yes, maybe not at the same level, less sites are censored here, but censorship is still censorship, and the trend is going towards more control and more censorship.

United states, israel (and palestine), etc. are different. Are we bothered by what israel is doing in palestine? Yes! (some of us). Can we actually do something about it? Sure... the germans can tell their government to stop selling weapons to israel [0], we can implement sanctions, tarrifs, etc. This is something that we can do "at home", something that can make some change. We did that for russia, we did that for iran, north korea etc (at various times and various levels), but we did something. We didn't really do that (at least not at scale) for isreal. US is doing that to us (EU) with tarrifs every two weeks, but we didn't really properly respond, even under the threat of an invasion on greenland.

Yes, restricted internet in iran is bad, but we can't stop it. Sadly, changing back EU rules is similarly hard to do, which again, is something that should be fixed, by us, at home.

[0] https://www.dw.com/en/war-in-gaza-germany-supplies-30-of-isr...

ericmay 12 hours ago||
> I can't do anything about iran, i don't live there

(Just a reminder that the above is what I responded to)

> But what can you do for iran?

You can encourage your governments to take action against Iran as well. Further sanctions, diplomatic pressure, providing support to the Iranian people, &c. In my case as an American I am encouraging my government to take the toughest action possible to stop Iran. Much of the blood of dead Palestinians can be placed at their feet too since they arm and support Hezbollah and Hamas who are doing what they can to keep killing people and keep the conflict active.

Just because you personally don't know what can be done doesn't mean something can't be done, and at a minimum you can encourage your government to continue to do the things it's already doing. You don't have to know what can be done, you can leave that up to others while demanding that the Iranian regime halt its indiscriminate mass murder of Iranian civilians before they make the number of people killed in Gaza look like a warmup.

Not living in Iran doesn't mean you (an EU citizen I presume) can't do anything about the actions of that regime. It's simply not a valid argument.

otherme123 16 hours ago|||
> Spain is blocking whole blocks of internet during football matches.

Lets make this clear: "Spain" is not blocking, some ISP companies which have many users ask the judge for permission to block IP ranges because they are streaming football matches. The judge agrees (they don't seem to know how Cloudflare works), so the ISPs are the ones that are blocking their own users to access sites behind Cloudflare. As they have millions of users, the block feels huge, but it is not issued by the government.

I am not a customer of those ISP, so my internet isn't disrupted at all during football matches. Some services, like annas-archive and torrent sites, are intermittently blocked, but you can easily avoid the blocks just by switching DNS server to 1.1.1.1 or 8.8.8.8.

pezgrande 15 hours ago|||
The fact they allow this sh*t even when it is widely know that is happening and being abused, makes the government also responsible because inaction.
otherme123 10 hours ago||
One thing is that they facilitate, not by inaction but by allowing judges to allow the blocks, and another different thing is saying that is the state the one who issues the block.
JasonADrury 14 hours ago|||
This is not even close to true. The Spanish state is mandating that ISPs implement these blocks or face significant penalties, up to and including imprisonment of responsible individuals.

Yes, technically "Spain" is not blocking. ISPs are. It is however the armed agents of "Spain", who will come and violently lock you in a tiny room if you refuse to do as you're told. If you try to resist hard enough, they will simply execute you on the spot.

otherme123 10 hours ago|||
So this is not even close to true en the first sentence, but it is true in the second paragraph.

As I said, my ISP doesn't do this block. Are they defying the Spain government mandate? Are they facing penalties or prison? This is a private thing that Movistar /O2, mainly, is doing, to protect their football stream. Thes is like saying that the US government forces Disney to enforce tneir IP protection.

Your last paragraph is a shame. Execute people on the spot, what the fuck are you even talking about? Spain don't even punish people torrenting or piracing unless you are profiting from it (e.g. selling pirate streams).

JasonADrury 10 hours ago||
The court orders cover only specific ISPs, if your ISP is not one of those, they are not defying the mandate.

You can see right here https://www.poderjudicial.es/search/AN/openDocument/766326fb...

> Are they defying the Spain government mandate?

Nobody has claimed that this is a government mandate, it isn't. It's a court order, coming from the judiciary. While Americans might consider the judiciary to be a branch of the government, in Spain it is considered entirely separate.

> Execute people on the spot, what the fuck are you even talking about?

The police will absolutely kill you if you try to forcefully resist them when they come to arrest you for violating a court order. This is not unique to Spain, but is more of a universal principle.

michelsedgh 20 hours ago||
They already have uncensored unfiltered sim cards they issue to their own people, we found that out when X (Twitter) started showing which country you made the accout from and thousands of people had Iran which normal people can't access X without VPN. Its just that they shut off the internet for normal people now, which they hadn't done before.
yolkedgeek 19 hours ago|
No, This is different.

In "normal" filtering situations, we can connect to most VPNs and do our stuff. When blackouts like these happen, EVERYTHING is blocked. It gets almost impossible to connect to a VPN. They have advanced tech that detects and blocks all VPNS and proxies. The internet speed is also now at crawling speed so you really can't upload download anything.

Also, in each blackout, people find ways to work around the censorship. And each time, they detect them and patch them. We have almost ran out of ways to prevent the censorship now.

j3th9n 18 hours ago||
LoRa Meshcore.
ranguna 16 hours ago|||
Isn't that easy to jam?
tryauuum 14 hours ago|||
How will this help connecting to the internet?
mrtksn 21 hours ago||
Do they have something like intranet with some local services, like in DPRK&Cuba? is this the case of completely losing connection and devices practically bricked for anything other than displaying the time?
siev 20 hours ago|
We do. It's not very good. As in, there isn't even a properly functioning domestic search engine that can match the quality of anything past AltaVista. The only local platforms worth a damn are the ones you'd be using anyway. (the local equivalents to Uber, Maps etc.)

All other platforms (instant messengers, social media, news) are massively unpopular for being horrid to use at best, and government spyware at worst.

To slow down the immediate damage the government has rolled back a few of the recent restrictions, hence why I can access HN. Among Google and a handful of other basic websites. But they are obviously experimenting and trying to figure out how much censorship they can get away with. There is talk of a planned "whitelisting" of the country's internet. Where almost all but a few big important services are blocked completely. This would have the bonus effect of making circumvention using VPNs and other methods even more difficult than it already is.

breppp 20 hours ago||
for someone with a tech background, how hard is it to setup your own tunnel? I'd assume cloud providers are whitelisted due to economic reasons?
e-khadem 20 hours ago||
Lol. That was _before_ these new restrictions. And don't assume that you could setup a simple wireguard server and be done with it. No, it had to be a proper low fingerprint method (e.g., you had to hide the tls-in-tls timing pattern and do traffic shaping). Now, something like dnstt sometimes works, sometimes doesn't. You may be able to open gmail in 10 minutes if it does, and you explicitly have to block the fonts.
yard2010 18 hours ago|||
Dam I feel so sorry for you :( At first I thought like gp, bypass it, then I realized you don't have the privilege to bypass it and leave trails behind. It's not like using a vpn to watch netflix of another country, as netflix won't knock on your door.

I wish you all the best. Stay safe my friend.

N19PEDL2 18 hours ago||||
> it had to be a proper low fingerprint method (e.g., you had to hide the tls-in-tls timing pattern and do traffic shaping).

Can anyone recommend a good book, video course or other material to learn more about these topics?

e-khadem 17 hours ago|||
FOCI papers[1] are great IMO, but some of submissions are just an academic curiosity, not a practical solution that works for the average Joe at a low cost and scale. For practical methods that are heavily used, you can take a look at popular opensource implementations and their documentation. Sing-box, Xray core, hiddify (their patches on top of xray and singbox), shadowsocks and shadowtls, and many more. ShadowTLS provides a good starting point with a fairly detailed documentation and clearly describes the development process.

The way that I see it, its not just a technical problem anymore. It's about making the methods as diverse as possible and to some extent messing up the network for everyone. In other words, we should increase the cost and the collateral damage of widespread censorship. As an anecdotal data point, the network was quite tightly controlled / monitored around 2023 in Iran and nothing worked reliably. Eventually people (ab)used the network (for example the tls fragments method) to the extent that most of the useful and unrelated websites (e.g., anything behind cloudflare, most of the Hetzner IPv4 addresses, and more) stopped working or were blocked. This was an unacceptably high collateral damage for the censors (?), so they "eased" some of the restrictions. Vless and Trojan were the same at that time and didn't work or were blocked very quickly, but they started working ~reliably again until very recently.

[1] https://www.petsymposium.org/foci/

nerdsniper 18 hours ago|||
https://people.cs.umass.edu/~amir/papers/parrot.pdf

Here's an overview. Be warned, the conclusion is:

> We enumerate the requirements that a censorship-resistant system must satisfy to successfully mimic another protocol and conclude that “unobservability by imitation” is a fundamentally flawed approach.

haute_cuisine 16 hours ago||||
What about SSH? Does it work? If yes, you can use some TUI browser as it would only pass updated SSH screen
breppp 17 hours ago|||
sorry if it came out as patronizing, I was genuinely curious as to the difficulty of bypassing these
feverzsj 20 hours ago||
It actually surprised me that they didn't do it before. China already achieved this in 2010s.
namirez 19 hours ago||
Hard to make it airtight without tanking the economy. Since the economy is already tanked, I guess they don’t care anymore.
johncolanduoni 19 hours ago||
Does the Iranian economy rely heavily on access to the global internet? They can’t trade with most of the world due to sanctions, so what in their internal economy grinds to a halt without global communications? I’m not saying I think that it wouldn’t, just that I don’t immediately grasp the mechanism.
namirez 19 hours ago||
Good points! I’m not an expert, so I’ll wait for people who know more to weigh in. But as far as I know: (1) they still need to import basic necessities like food and medicine, and (2) despite heavy investment, they haven’t managed to build an intranet that’s fully isolated from the internet.
culi 20 hours ago||
Have they though? Everybody I know who grew up in China has told me its trivial to bypass restrictions with VPNs
QianXuesen 19 hours ago|||
It’s a deliberate “pressure valve.” China tolerates access for productivity but retains a kill switch for sensitive periods: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/how-...
RandyOrion 9 hours ago||||
NO.

They can do unconditional blocking at any moment and suddenly you can experience Internet blackout. [1]

The censorship from GFW is ever evolving. See the endless cat-and-mouse games yourself. [2][3]

[1] https://github.com/net4people/bbs/issues/511

[2] https://github.com/net4people/bbs/issues?q=is%3Aissue+state%...

[3] https://gfw.report/en/

p0w3n3d 19 hours ago||||
The question is what do you win when found using VPN?
bspammer 17 hours ago|||
There is pretty much no risk. It’s expected you will use a VPN, you can talk about it openly in public.

Now, if you’re doing something unrelated that the administration doesn’t like, you can expect VPN use to be included in the long list of charges.

feverzsj 17 hours ago|||
You phone and computer will be checked thoroughly using automated tools. If they didn't find any sensitive keyword, you'll be fined and recorded in the system. If they find something, a detention for at least 3 days or ... forever.

That's the standard procedure. But polices in developed areas usually treat them like antragsdelikte(no trial without a complaint).

g947o 14 hours ago||||
I suggest you take a look at the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Firewall
peyton 18 hours ago||||
Depending on where you are, “everybody I know who grew up in China” may not be an unbiased sample w.r.t. ideology, forthcomingness, or truth-telling.
HDThoreaun 18 hours ago||||
"bypass restrictions" meaning put on a list of people to closely watch.
blahgeek 12 hours ago||||
I guess by "Everybody I know who grew up in China" you mean those elites who speaks English and have already bypassed restrictions to talk to you online or travels to other countries. There's some selection bias here.
IshKebab 16 hours ago|||
Apparently they use traffic analysis now so it's difficult to bypass even with VPNs.
yanhangyhy 15 hours ago||
thats sad... this kind of blackout only works for china because china has a massive internal market and the gov has a way of check things like: "we know you are using VPN, but as long as you dont do or say terrible things about CCP, we dont care". so this model works.

but even with his, i still feel angry when i want to check something on google/ins...when i dont have a realiable VPN. i remeber when we start working on golang dev, and because its under google domain so many sub sites is blocked including golang ones, its very time consuming for chinese devs to develop golang projects, you have to figure out the VPN/goproxy... stuff..

jobgh 21 hours ago||
No shot. The economy is already in the gutter. The productivity hit of a total internet cutoff would be a death sentence
dpe82 20 hours ago||
That assumes the regime cares more about the economic prosperity of their people than about staying in power. So far they seem to care more about power. North Korea provides a model for how terrible the situation can get for every day people in that sort of arrangement.
21asdffdsa12 13 hours ago|||
The regime does not even care about the capital having water in the next month. They are basically doing pre-emptive starvation culling at this point.
halestock 20 hours ago||||
You can only let that go so far, because at the end of the day you need to pay the military to keep you in power.
esafak 19 hours ago|||
In the long run we're all dead. In the meantime, NK is still standing.
bell-cot 19 hours ago|||
The rules are rather different when your economy is mostly oil - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrostate
ReptileMan 14 hours ago||||
North Korea is effectively an island. Iran has many neighbors and long borders. They have no choice but to be at least semi integrated into the world and strong enough to defend themselves.
tdeck 20 hours ago||||
Some level of eonomic prosperity is necessary to keep the government's key supporters (e.g. the ruling class and the army) satisfied.
Imustaskforhelp 20 hours ago|||
Their economic prosperity is more linked to Oil than Internet.

Plus, the elites economic prosperity is also linked to their not being protests and for the toppling of govt to not occur and they might be willing to offset some losses to keep the average population in check

Which sucks for the average iranian but we saw how their protests were cracked down with 20-30 THOUSAND people killed and Iran hiding bodies etc.

I have heard that all shops are either shut down or running at the most minimum capacity. Economic prosperity just isn't a question now in Iran.

reeredfdfdf 18 hours ago||
Yeah, foreign intervention is probably the best option at this point. If the elites are willing to murder tends of thousands of innocent people, then I see no moral issues with foreign intervention to get rid of IRGC and current government using any means necessary.
kelipso 12 hours ago|||
Consent manufactured or manufacturing consent I wonder.
AnimalMuppet 12 hours ago|||
Two things can be true at once:

1. The government of Iran is an oppressive, immoral dictatorship.

2. Foreign intervention to try to remove it would likely result in worse outcomes, not better.

s5300 20 hours ago|||
[dead]
duxup 6 hours ago|||
Is the Iranian economy tied to individuals having internet access to the rest of the world much?
bpodgursky 20 hours ago|||
North Korea unfortunately has given them a path forward. If you're willing to murder your own citizens en masse, you can get away with about anything.
reeredfdfdf 18 hours ago|||
North Korea has nukes though. Iran doesn't, and probably never will.
bpodgursky 10 hours ago||
Iran has 90 million people and a giant conventional missile arsenal that deter neighbors from allowing military action against it. Invading Iran would be enormously difficult. It will also probably get nukes sooner or later. But it doesn't need nukes to be nearly untouchable.
reeredfdfdf 9 hours ago||
Considering America and Israel accomplished total air superiority over Iran in matter of days just few months ago, they're obviously pretty damn far from being untouchable.

Invading Iran would be difficult, but totally destroying IRGC and military (as long as they side with the former) wouldn't be that hard. Dropping communications equipment and weapons to Iranian opposition groups wouldn't be hard either.

bpodgursky 7 hours ago||
Yes, but what was accomplished with the air superiority? It's not regime change. It set back the nuclear program, maybe six months. That probably won't work ad infinitum, at some point they are going to build redundant sites and hardened facilities that are resilient to bunker busters.

The IRGC and military are HUGE. This is a numbers thing, not a competence thing. Neither the US or Israel has the munitions to make a lasting dent with air power alone.

_wire_ 20 hours ago|||
Yes, just start small
heraldgeezer 16 hours ago|||
No that is american propaganda. Glorious islamist economy is great! Look at ICE shootings instead.
bluescrn 13 hours ago||
And if you disagree you're a russian bot. But there wouldn't possibly be any middle-eastern bots spreading propaganda...
dyauspitr 17 hours ago||
I don’t think a lot of their economy depends on the internet. Even rich countries in the Middle East would continue to sell oil if the internet wasn’t functional. Might cause some logistical issues but nothing that can’t be done over the phone.
cryptoegorophy 20 hours ago||
Spacex satellites blockage was the surprise. How did they do it? I thought it would be the best dooms day kind of insurance. Turns out not.
m4rtink 16 hours ago||
AFAIK they used GPS spoofing which confuses the Starlink terminals - they need to know where they are to properly connect to the satellites above.

This can be overriden to use "Starlink positioning" where the terminal ignores GPS signals and dtermines its position based on Starlink satellite signals. I think this is what is used in Ukraine where GPS is mostly jammed/spoofed to hell even far from the front.

The GPS positioning is the default as it is likely more user friendly/has quicker lock in normal circumstances.

Another venue of attack could be the Starlink WiFi AP included in the terminals- you could track that down.

So in general:

* switch the terminal to Starlink positioning

* disable the Starkink terminal WiFi AP and conect by ethernet or connect an AP via ethernet with a new SSID and different MAC address

And it should be good to go.

cryptoegorophy 6 hours ago||
Spoofing - ok, but how did they detect all the starlinks? Assuming that users were smart to not turn on WiFi on starlink. Do these antennas emit certain waves that a “scanner” can detect and with 99% certainty figure out that that point on a map is a starlink antenna ?
edg5000 19 hours ago|||
My wild guess is that jamming is local. Major cities may be fully jammed. To get an idea about GNSS jamming range (different signal of course, probably much easier to jam), there are maps online where you can see which parts of Europe are currently GNSS-jammed. But I have the same question as you.
moebrowne 12 hours ago|||
https://gpsjam.org/
exDM69 12 hours ago||||
The GPS jamming maps are based on commercial air traffic flying in the area.

While that gives some ideas of how widespread the jamming is, it won't give accurate information about the range (air traffic avoids areas with jamming) of the interference or any information from places where there is no commercial air traffic (war zones, etc).

4gotunameagain 18 hours ago|||
> probably much easier to jam

Definitely much easier to jam. Much higher orbits for gnss satellites, much lower signal intensity.

Also, starlink uses phased arrays with beamforming, effectively creating an electronically steerable directional antenna. It is harder to jam two directional antennas talking to each other, as your jammers are on the sides, where the lobes of the antenna radiation pattern are smaller.

Still, we're talking about signals coming from space, so maybe it is just enough to sprinkle more jammers in an urban setting.. I'm curious as well.

fc417fc802 17 hours ago|||
Supposedly it's high packet loss but still available to at least some extent. Or at least it was initially? Really highlights the importance of low bandwidth P2P capable messaging systems that support caching messages for later delivery as well as multiple underlying transports.
DeathArrow 18 hours ago|||
You can jam the satellites, you can jam the receivers and you can jam GPS.
Jhater 20 hours ago|||
[flagged]
alephnerd 20 hours ago||
RF and GPS jamming has been a solved problem for decades. As a SWE, we are all expected to take Physics E&M, Circuits, and CompArch in our CS undergrad - think back to those classes.
merelythere 19 hours ago||
Genuine question, is it that easy to deploy these tools over a country that big?
alephnerd 19 hours ago||
Yes in most population centers. Any country that has the ability to stand up a cellular network has the ability to deploy jamming at scale.

The components needed to build jammers and EW systems have been heavily commodified for a decade now (hell, your phone's power brick, car, and TV all have dual use components for these kinds of applications), and most regional powers have been working on compound semiconductors and offensive electronic warfare for almost a generation now.

fc417fc802 17 hours ago||
I don't think it's as easy as you're suggesting. GPS L1 jamming has been done routinely enough but the satellite bands (X/Ku/Ka) appear to be much more difficult to pull off.

Iran was reported to have mobile units with a fairly short range that constantly roamed around, only hitting 2 of the 3 bands (Ku/Ka). They're also reported to have received mobile Russian military units capable of jamming all 3 (X/Ku/Ka) over a much wider area. (I'm not actually clear the extent to which X band is associated with either Starlink or Starshield. Starshield also reportedly operates to at least some extent in parts of the S band. [0])

So the technology clearly exists but it doesn't seem to be something you can trivially throw together in your basement. That's quite unlike (for example) a cell phone jammer which a hobbyist can cheaply and easily assemble at home. I assume the extreme directional specificity of the antennas plays a large part in that.

[0] https://www.npr.org/2025/10/17/nx-s1-5575254/spacex-starshie...

askvictor 15 hours ago||
Couldn't they target each starlink satellite for jamming as it flies overhead? The sat would still send fine, but you could effectively kill the antenna?
fc417fc802 15 hours ago||
I guess (non-expert understanding) that it depends on how tight the beamforming is (relative to the distance of the jammer from a given ground station) or alternatively if the jammer can prevent the satellite from successfully locating the ground station to begin with.
More comments...