Если самоназванная «охранота» обвиняется в судах Российской Федерации по Статье 20.3.1. КоАП РФ «Возбуждение ненависти либо вражды, а равно унижение человеческого достоинства», то работает она, скорее всего, на интересы сопредельного бывшего государства «Украина» и против Государства Российского.
А обвиняющие её – это прокуроры Прокуратуры Российской Федерации.
Политология для взрослых. ________________________ ККН™, служба очистки Рунета от tg-отбросов, подпишись! Связь с редакцией - наш бот.
Если самоназванная «охранота» обвиняется в судах Российской Федерации по Статье 20.3.1. КоАП РФ «Возбуждение ненависти либо вражды, а равно унижение человеческого достоинства», то работает она, скорее всего, на интересы сопредельного бывшего государства «Украина» и против Государства Российского.
А обвиняющие её – это прокуроры Прокуратуры Российской Федерации.
Политология для взрослых. ________________________ ККН™, служба очистки Рунета от tg-отбросов, подпишись! Связь с редакцией - наш бот.
At this point, however, Durov had already been working on Telegram with his brother, and further planned a mobile-first social network with an explicit focus on anti-censorship. Later in April, he told TechCrunch that he had left Russia and had “no plans to go back,” saying that the nation was currently “incompatible with internet business at the moment.” He added later that he was looking for a country that matched his libertarian ideals to base his next startup. At the start of 2018, the company attempted to launch an Initial Coin Offering (ICO) which would enable it to enable payments (and earn the cash that comes from doing so). The initial signals were promising, especially given Telegram’s user base is already fairly crypto-savvy. It raised an initial tranche of cash – worth more than a billion dollars – to help develop the coin before opening sales to the public. Unfortunately, third-party sales of coins bought in those initial fundraising rounds raised the ire of the SEC, which brought the hammer down on the whole operation. In 2020, officials ordered Telegram to pay a fine of $18.5 million and hand back much of the cash that it had raised. Right now the digital security needs of Russians and Ukrainians are very different, and they lead to very different caveats about how to mitigate the risks associated with using Telegram. For Ukrainians in Ukraine, whose physical safety is at risk because they are in a war zone, digital security is probably not their highest priority. They may value access to news and communication with their loved ones over making sure that all of their communications are encrypted in such a manner that they are indecipherable to Telegram, its employees, or governments with court orders. Telegram has become more interventionist over time, and has steadily increased its efforts to shut down these accounts. But this has also meant that the company has also engaged with lawmakers more generally, although it maintains that it doesn’t do so willingly. For instance, in September 2021, Telegram reportedly blocked a chat bot in support of (Putin critic) Alexei Navalny during Russia’s most recent parliamentary elections. Pavel Durov was quoted at the time saying that the company was obliged to follow a “legitimate” law of the land. He added that as Apple and Google both follow the law, to violate it would give both platforms a reason to boot the messenger from its stores. The War on Fakes channel has repeatedly attempted to push conspiracies that footage from Ukraine is somehow being falsified. One post on the channel from February 24 claimed without evidence that a widely viewed photo of a Ukrainian woman injured in an airstrike in the city of Chuhuiv was doctored and that the woman was seen in a different photo days later without injuries. The post, which has over 600,000 views, also baselessly claimed that the woman's blood was actually makeup or grape juice.
from ms
