Here's my point though, if Voat is inside the US it's actually more difficult for the NSA to fuck with them.
I'd have to disagree. I think the situation is exactly the opposite.
What the agencies do, both inside and outside the US, is really, quite simply, espionage. There are laws in place in the US that makes that espionage legal, so long as they (purportedly) do this or don't do that. Outside of the US, it's just plain old espionage, subject to the laws of whatever nation it's directed against, which undoubtedly start with prison terms and run all the way up to capital punishment.
It's not that they have no oversight in foreign countries - it's that they're criminals in foreign countries, and therefore hiding from the authorities. In the US, they're not criminals, and it's to their benefit to operate in the open and take full advantage of whatever the law grants them.
It also puts Voat's US users at greater risk because as I understand it any communcations that cross international boundaries are not protected and are subject to much greater scrutiny.
THAT is an issue however, and just for the reason you state. The (mostly laughable and certainly regularly ignored) safeguards that are purportedly in place for US citizens generally don't apply to communications from outside to inside the US.
Also it makes Voat more vulnerable in terms of free speech/hate speech if it's not in the US.
Only if one limits the alternatives to European nations. I have no doubt that there are any number of small data havens that have never and will never have anything even vaguely resembling hate speech laws, and that would be more than happy to incorporate Voat and host its servers and never even touch its data. But yes - that would then grant the three letter agencies more legal oversight, at least as far as US users go, since it would be international communication.
...it's a complicated issue so if they are seriously considering doing this I really hope they do their homework.
I haven't seen any sign at all that anyone's actually considering doing it. I merely posted this because a user suggested it, and I was surprised by both the number of people who immediately opposed the suggestion and the vehemence with which they opposed it. It just seemed a bit... odd.
Granted, much of it seems to be 4chan grade hostility to the OP's shallow misunderstanding of the actual threats posed by the three letter agencies, but still, I find it intriguing that so many people jump so quickly to a hostile response to the idea of Voat moving out from under the jurisdiction of the US government.
Almost... as if they actually benefit from that...
Bigz_Sarducci ago
Did some whiny pussies cry to someone and the VOAT owners got threatened a lawsuit? What did I miss?
Rottcodd ago
I'd have to disagree. I think the situation is exactly the opposite.
What the agencies do, both inside and outside the US, is really, quite simply, espionage. There are laws in place in the US that makes that espionage legal, so long as they (purportedly) do this or don't do that. Outside of the US, it's just plain old espionage, subject to the laws of whatever nation it's directed against, which undoubtedly start with prison terms and run all the way up to capital punishment.
It's not that they have no oversight in foreign countries - it's that they're criminals in foreign countries, and therefore hiding from the authorities. In the US, they're not criminals, and it's to their benefit to operate in the open and take full advantage of whatever the law grants them.
THAT is an issue however, and just for the reason you state. The (mostly laughable and certainly regularly ignored) safeguards that are purportedly in place for US citizens generally don't apply to communications from outside to inside the US.
Only if one limits the alternatives to European nations. I have no doubt that there are any number of small data havens that have never and will never have anything even vaguely resembling hate speech laws, and that would be more than happy to incorporate Voat and host its servers and never even touch its data. But yes - that would then grant the three letter agencies more legal oversight, at least as far as US users go, since it would be international communication.
I haven't seen any sign at all that anyone's actually considering doing it. I merely posted this because a user suggested it, and I was surprised by both the number of people who immediately opposed the suggestion and the vehemence with which they opposed it. It just seemed a bit... odd.
Rottcodd ago
I just found this sort of interesting.
Granted, much of it seems to be 4chan grade hostility to the OP's shallow misunderstanding of the actual threats posed by the three letter agencies, but still, I find it intriguing that so many people jump so quickly to a hostile response to the idea of Voat moving out from under the jurisdiction of the US government.
Almost... as if they actually benefit from that...
arrggg ago
I have never seen "a hostile response" to that idea. Unless you can provide quotes, this smells like a giant pile of bullshit.