Uzbekistan Blacks Out Internet To Quell Dissent (codastory.com) 55
Human rights researcher Frankie Vetch writes via Coda Story: In early July protests broke out in Karakalpakstan, an autonomous region surrounded by deserts in Uzbekistan. It turned nasty on the evening of July 1 when the police began shooting people. The state said that at least 18 people died, with hundreds of others injured. The protests, which occurred in the regional capital of Nukus, erupted in response to a proposed constitutional change that would see the Karakalpakstan shift from being an autonomous region, with the right to secede from Uzbekistan, to a province of the country. In an attempt to quell dissent, the government turned to a tactic that has become increasingly common in the region: they cut off the internet.
Reports indicate that as early as June 26, before protests began, the government was already imposing some form of an information blackout by targeting people's access to mobile internet connection. Later the state began shutting down ATMs and payment services. Since then internet connection has remained largely restricted, with a small respite last week when it was turned on again for two hours. The state of emergency has been lifted in Karakalpakstan but as of Monday it seems the internet has still not been fully restored.
According to Anastasiya Zhyrmont, a campaigner in Eastern Europe and Central Asia for the digital rights non-profit Access Now, getting information out of the region is extremely difficult. "The information flow is very limited," she told me. "Since the first of July the internet has been so unstable. Even if people can get online it can take hours to upload photos, and up to five to 10 minutes to send a simple text message." For journalists and non-profits unable to access the region, this presents a significant challenge to covering the issues. Which is, of course, the purpose.
Reports indicate that as early as June 26, before protests began, the government was already imposing some form of an information blackout by targeting people's access to mobile internet connection. Later the state began shutting down ATMs and payment services. Since then internet connection has remained largely restricted, with a small respite last week when it was turned on again for two hours. The state of emergency has been lifted in Karakalpakstan but as of Monday it seems the internet has still not been fully restored.
According to Anastasiya Zhyrmont, a campaigner in Eastern Europe and Central Asia for the digital rights non-profit Access Now, getting information out of the region is extremely difficult. "The information flow is very limited," she told me. "Since the first of July the internet has been so unstable. Even if people can get online it can take hours to upload photos, and up to five to 10 minutes to send a simple text message." For journalists and non-profits unable to access the region, this presents a significant challenge to covering the issues. Which is, of course, the purpose.
Great (Score:3)
I wish the world would stop catching on fire for a moment.
Let's all agree at least that peace is better than war.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
There is always someone who wants to take something from someone else and thinks that using force is the easiest way.
If the rest of us agree to stop it, then this can end.
A similar example is that most wars in history used to be wars over succession. Since we discovered democracy (and other better ways to depose leaders, like impeachment), wars over succession have largely come to an end.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There is always someone who wants to take something from someone else and thinks that using force is the easiest way. Unfortunately, they are often correct, so the cycle continues.
I agree. I think it appears at all levels, from petty theft, to organized crime, to a nation using violence to get another to give in to its demands for obedience.
Re: (Score:3)
Peace is better than war when you're living a life of opulence.
For poor bastards slaving away with little hope in miserable conditions (and by that I mean actual miserable conditions, and not the opulence that even the poor in Western nations have), war is about the only opportunity they have to improve their lives.
Oh and Uzbekistan is that nation with "nice" reputation for being the only nation to to boil dissidents alive this century to quell dissent. So "war" that is conducted in a way that overthrows th
Re: (Score:3)
Fun part is, Uzbeks are THE main immigrant nationality that scares the living shit out of Russians. Because they have this habit of stabbing people in the neck when they get into the fights among other things.
They also really like getting into fights.
And large Russian cities are choke full of Uzbek immigrant workers. Uzbekistan is one of the few nations left that has a very good demographic profile and can afford to export workers abroad so remittances can flow back.
Re: (Score:2)
So if the Russians invade, booby trap the can and the washer.
Re: Great (Score:2)
I hardly see a shit country that almost no one knows having a conflict as "the world catching fire". There was always stuff like this going on in those type countries science about the dawn of mankind.
It really sucks for the people who live there and hopefully they will rise up and pull a Sri Lanka. There is surely a Robin Hood there to lead the way
Re: (Score:2)
I don't see that the situation in Sri Lanka has gotten better. Things are seriously fucked there right now.
To be clear, the president needed to go, but who will replace him? Will it be someone better?
Re: Great (Score:2)
No, in Sri Lanka even the opposition has ties to the President. It is basically an incestuous pool of coalitions that keep themselves in power.
As long as people demand the government to be responsible for their welfare rather than demanding freedom, it wonâ(TM)t go well.
Re: (Score:2)
As long as people demand the government to be responsible for their welfare rather than demanding freedom, it wonâ(TM)t go well.
That's an interesting thought.
Re: (Score:1)
There are many people richer than you to pick out of, there is only 1 government.
Re: (Score:2)
The government's only excuse to exist is for the benefit of its population. If there is no benefit for the population, get rid of the crap and install something else.
Re: Great (Score:2)
Whatever the case may be, seeing footage of Sri Lankans enjoying the luxuries that used to belong to the bastards at the top was a heartwarming experience.
Re: Great (Score:2)
Also the same thing happened in the Phillipines back in 1986. They found Imelda's extensive shoe collection.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on where. War is good for business, provided you're not stupid enough to wage it at home.
Ask Germany for details, they know all about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on where. War is good for business,
It's really not.
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on who's fighting who. Granted, the crap going down in Ukraine sure isn't good for Europe. Produce costs are up, power costs are up and there isn't much to export there for profit. But if two countries in Africa go after each other that you have no political or economic ties with? Ka-ching!
Re: (Score:2)
But if two countries in Africa go after each other that you have no political or economic ties with? Ka-ching!
So 2 poor countries buy 100 million dollars worth of weapons from you.
Stabilise and develop them and sell a billon dollars worth of plastic trinkets and electronic doodads instead. Much better for business.
Now that they are wealthier, they can afford 200 million dollars worth of weapons to deter their neighbors, and not be at war.
Profit off building their infrastructure. Lend them the money and make even more out of the deal. If you're bold enough, outright own their infrastructure
Re: (Score:2)
Next year thinking.
I don't want them to eat up the resources that my country needs, I want them to use the weapons my country produces. A wealthy population wastes resources on irrelevant things like food and shelter and heating and stuff. That's something I need. They get my weapons, they pay with their rare earth and nonferrous metals that my industry needs.
I don't need another competitor for oil, gas and raw materials! The moment they stop shooting at each other is when they start building up an industr.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't want them to eat up the resources that my country needs, I want them to use the weapons my country produces.
But they're not now. They are buying weapons from country C who is helping them to develop.
A wealthy population wastes resources on irrelevant things like food and shelter and heating and stuff. That's something I need.
"Irrelevant things" that country C is selling to them.
They get my weapons, they pay with their rare earth and nonferrous metals that my industry needs.
They don't. The buy C's weapons now.
Also the tiny amount of stuff they could dig up by hand while all the people were busy fighting a war. That's peanuts compared to how much they are now supplying to country C. Now that they have stability and proper infrastructure.
I don't need another competitor for oil, gas and raw materials! The moment they stop shooting at each other is when they start building up an industr... oh wait a second, cheap labor!
They aren't a competitor. They are a supplier. If you do it right, you own all the mines and they d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So 2 poor countries buy 100 million dollars worth of weapons from you.
Not from you. From a crappy corporation in your country. You will see very little of that money.
Did you have a point? (Score:2)
So 2 poor countries buy 100 million dollars worth of weapons from you.
Not from you. From a crappy corporation in your country. You will see very little of that money.
Did you have a point?
Re: (Score:2)
Seems I replied to you first thing in the morning, when my brain was still muddled. I might have confused your post with someone else's. I did have a point, but I think it supports your point.
My point was that the military-industrial-compex doesn't actually benefit the average citizen in a country very much (other than helping the country defend itself). They don't actually make that much money.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, war is profitable for some that have the money and the influence to promote war. The formula is complete. No other opinions will sway them from their path. Unless, somehow, we manage to turn the arms manufacturers into profit centers for peace. Good luck with that.
Re: (Score:2)
for some that have the money and the influence to promote war. The formula is complete. No other opinions will sway them from their path.
Well that's silly though, these people don't have infinite influence, or even infinite money. They're just one power among many competing powers.
Re: (Score:2)
Until someone comes along that has enough money to outright buy-out the people that make profits from war? No. No they're not. The people that make money from war make more money from war than the people opposed to war will ever see. And, unfortunately for us, our world runs on the concept that money = power. More $ === more power.
Re: (Score:2)
The people that make money from war make more money from war than the people opposed to war will ever see.
Not collectively, no, not at all. Collectively, those of us opposed to war make more than the people who make money from war.
Seriously, go look how much profit Raytheon makes. It's not much.
Surprised that worked (Score:1)
I'd honestly have imagined cutting off the internet would have the opposite effect. If you can't vent by bitching and moaning on forums and social media, it might start to seem appealing to go out and raise some hell.
Oh who am I kidding? That's why I have a local media server full of movies and TV shows. The world can just go completely to shit and just I'll be watching old episodes of Star Trek from back when the writing was (arguably) better.
The BBC, VOA and the like don't need (Score:5, Insightful)
their own transmitters anymore.
They can just have a website.
Just another kernel of wisdom from the crowd that thinks milk comes from a carton, electricity comes from the outlet, and magical fairies deposit manufactured goods on their doorstep.
Re: (Score:2)
their own transmitters anymore.
They can just have a website.
Just another kernel of wisdom from the crowd that thinks milk comes from a carton, electricity comes from the outlet, and magical fairies deposit manufactured goods on their doorstep.
And how effective are these internet blackouts? I doubt they've ever done more than delay the inevitable. Especially after the army starts deserting rather than shoot their own people (or worse large sections of the Army switch sides to the rebels, which is usually how it goes, hence proper dictators like Bolsonaro make sure that the Generals happy under their rule).
Also you were saying about the crowd who think milk comes from stores... Where is Uzbekistan on a map and who are their neighbours. A terres
Re: The BBC, VOA and the like don't need (Score:2)
BBC and VOA used to transmit on shortwave bands. On a good night you could hear that shit in Siberia.
As for the Army not willing to shoot their own people? Clearly you were born, raised, and never had any contact outside of the rich bits of the rich West. People will knife eachother over sneakers in some parts of American cities. You think they won't shoot eachother for shits and giggles in some third world fuckistan?
Ha!
This is a great idea (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As we all know Uzbekistan was a completely peaceful country with no dissent prior to the internet.
I doubt most people know much about Uzbekistan, except that it ends in "stan". ...
Many will simply make assumptions from there
Re: (Score:1)
I doubt most people know much about Uzbekistan, except that it ends in "stan".
Perhaps if they spent less time obsessing over Eminem, they could fix their craphole of a country. /s
Re: (Score:2)
Wish we had a peer 2 peer wifi network... (Score:2)
Seems possible to string together many wifi routers that overlap to at least give local connectivity. There would need to be apps that worked without central servers though.
IM/chat seems obvious.
Last I looked there was a group in Europe (Spain?) working on firmware to setup mesh networks. Sadly was limited which routers it worked on.
Re: (Score:3)
For messaging, take a look at Briar [briarproject.org]. If Internet access is lost, messages can be transmitted via WiFi hotspot or point-to-point with Bluetooth.
Death to whateverstan! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Do we get killed in alphabetical order or by size?
Disinformation (Score:2)
Briar (Score:2)
Get Briar. Support Briar.
It works through Tor hidden services but if those go down you can relay with Bluetooth or even Sneakernet.
The latter implies HAM radio as a backhaul option.
Re: (Score:2)
Alas, ham radio is easy to pinpoint, just using a van and a directional antenna. So it wouldn't be long before some rather displeased Kilocycle Cops come knocking.