HN Reader

This is just the cost of doing business as a social media company now. Either you bow to the whims of local government or you get replaced by someone who does. Pick your battles wisely.

This is what I don't get about social media censorship. I can understand complying with legal demands, even those from countries with corrupt or tyrannical governments - it's either that, or get blocked, and one could argue it is not up to a corporation to decide when a legal request is legitimate or not.

But why, why hide the censorship itself, and the reasons for it? Why not put a big red "This user blocked due to legal request from country X", or "because or moderators determined the user to be abusive" or "due to legal takedown request from company X"? Why is it always no reason given, just a passive-voice "user has been blocked", with no hint as to by who or why. Or worse, just a "user/video does not exist".

I didn’t even bother with bluesky. Sooner or later it’s gonna become another twitter.