СВО длится уже более тысячи дней – более 70% продолжительности Великой Отечественной войны. И почти все это время патриотические блогеры вопрошают, почему наша армия, несмотря на очевидные возможности, не уничтожает украинскую энергосистему, железнодорожную инфраструктуру и «центры принятия решений».
Поскольку человеку свойственно хотя бы пытаться объяснять происходящее вокруг него (и тем более с ним) хотя бы самому себе, решил узнать у своей аудитории в телеграм-канале: «Как Вы лично объясняете самому себе отсутствие уничтожения энергосистемы Украины (чуть более 10 подстанций), ее транспортной инфраструктуры и отсутствие ударов по «центрам принятия решений» на ее территории?»
СВО длится уже более тысячи дней – более 70% продолжительности Великой Отечественной войны. И почти все это время патриотические блогеры вопрошают, почему наша армия, несмотря на очевидные возможности, не уничтожает украинскую энергосистему, железнодорожную инфраструктуру и «центры принятия решений».
Поскольку человеку свойственно хотя бы пытаться объяснять происходящее вокруг него (и тем более с ним) хотя бы самому себе, решил узнать у своей аудитории в телеграм-канале: «Как Вы лично объясняете самому себе отсутствие уничтожения энергосистемы Украины (чуть более 10 подстанций), ее транспортной инфраструктуры и отсутствие ударов по «центрам принятия решений» на ее территории?»
Since its launch in 2013, Telegram has grown from a simple messaging app to a broadcast network. Its user base isn’t as vast as WhatsApp’s, and its broadcast platform is a fraction the size of Twitter, but it’s nonetheless showing its use. While Telegram has been embroiled in controversy for much of its life, it has become a vital source of communication during the invasion of Ukraine. But, if all of this is new to you, let us explain, dear friends, what on Earth a Telegram is meant to be, and why you should, or should not, need to care. On February 27th, Durov posted that Channels were becoming a source of unverified information and that the company lacks the ability to check on their veracity. He urged users to be mistrustful of the things shared on Channels, and initially threatened to block the feature in the countries involved for the length of the war, saying that he didn’t want Telegram to be used to aggravate conflict or incite ethnic hatred. He did, however, walk back this plan when it became clear that they had also become a vital communications tool for Ukrainian officials and citizens to help coordinate their resistance and evacuations. The next bit isn’t clear, but Durov reportedly claimed that his resignation, dated March 21st, was an April Fools’ prank. TechCrunch implies that it was a matter of principle, but it’s hard to be clear on the wheres, whos and whys. Similarly, on April 17th, the Moscow Times quoted Durov as saying that he quit the company after being pressured to reveal account details about Ukrainians protesting the then-president Viktor Yanukovych. For Oleksandra Tsekhanovska, head of the Hybrid Warfare Analytical Group at the Kyiv-based Ukraine Crisis Media Center, the effects are both near- and far-reaching. 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.
from tr
