Дисклеймер: мы переводим популярные комиксы о политике, чтобы показать нашим читателям актуальный западный политический дискурс. Перевод даётся "as is" и не означает согласия с позицией авторов.
Дисклеймер: мы переводим популярные комиксы о политике, чтобы показать нашим читателям актуальный западный политический дискурс. Перевод даётся "as is" и не означает согласия с позицией авторов.
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. Under the Sebi Act, the regulator has the power to carry out search and seizure of books, registers, documents including electronics and digital devices from any person associated with the securities market. Apparently upbeat developments in Russia's discussions with Ukraine helped at least temporarily send investors back into risk assets. Russian President Vladimir Putin said during a meeting with his Belarusian counterpart Alexander Lukashenko that there were "certain positive developments" occurring in the talks with Ukraine, according to a transcript of their meeting. Putin added that discussions were happening "almost on a daily basis." So, uh, whenever I hear about Telegram, it’s always in relation to something bad. What gives? Despite Telegram's origins, its approach to users' security has privacy advocates worried.
from us
