Summary:

Police opened fire on a Gen Z-led protest in New Baneshwar, Kathmandu on the afternoon of Monday, September 8, 2025, killing 14 people and wounding many others. Hospitals reported multiple fatalities and dozens of injured: seven died at the National Trauma Centre (with 10 in critical condition and 20 more treated), three died at Everest Hospital (about 50 treated, four critical), two died at Civil Hospital, and one died at KMC–Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital. Police used live rounds, tear gas and water cannons against demonstrators who were protesting social media restrictions and alleged government corruption. Protests spread across Kathmandu and other major cities, with ongoing rallies and clashes reported. Authorities have not yet released the identities of the deceased.

Archive: https://archive.is/9Iubj

no comments (yet)

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
there doesn't seem to be anything here
10 comments in c/world@lemmy.world view that post
[–] 22 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

Do labels like “Gen Z” really span the globe? I know they start out being defined as an age range and obviously there are young and old people everywhere.

But the way we name generations and refer to them as groups with shared characteristics is, I think, culturally specific.

Are 80yo people in India actually “boomers?” Did they experience a post-WW2 baby boom, a sexual revolution, a “me” movement, explosive divorce rates etc? I’m sure that there are inter-generational tensions everywhere and I’m sure young people in India sometimes roll their eyes at their elders. That doesn’t make them “boomers.”

In general I always thought these were western or specifically American generational labels that don’t necessarily translate globally (though I suppose for younger generations the internet has made the experience of growing up somewhat more globally shared).

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] -32 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    Honestly don't understand the protests. The government should ban social media sites that don't comply with basic safety regulations.

    Of course, regardless of the original cause, now that the government has executed 14 protesters, that will be the cause.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Basic safety regulations? I just skimmed the 2023 act and that shit was never gonna fly, and it feels like that was the point. Basically the only way way anyone can comply is to branch off a Nepal version of their site and do whatever they're told.

    And I don't know why we'd be acting high and mighty here. mastodon and presumably lemmy are blocked along with the rest.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The document is right here, chapter 2 is like a page of bullet points:

    https://www.law-democracy.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Nepal.Social-Media-Bill_2025_Eng.pdf

    All it requires is that they establish a single legal representative in the country. Nothing about spinning off separate companies.

    Brazil requires the same. It is not a crazy regulation to require a company operating in your country to have a legal representative there.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    ... That is absolutely not all it requires. The document you linked is only 19 pages long. Surely you can be bothered to look past the first two? The platform must police itself per the rules in the document or face license revocation, and the rules are broad and have the classic 'contrary to national interest' out for whatever the government wants. The point of a separate platform is that nobody is going to enforce these rules globally, so it would have to be a Nepal only branch of the site.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    The point of a separate platform is that nobody is going to enforce these rules globally, so it would have to be a Nepal only branch of the site.

    Multiple social media networks did comply.

    It's mind boggling that half the threads are bitching about Zuckerberg wasting billions, and everyone in here is whining that it would be too expensive for Facebook to pay someone in Nepal to be their representative.

    And yes, do read Chapter 12 and notice that literally only a single regulation in there is remotely problematic, and it's the broad national interest one. Literally all the rest are just 'respect user privacy', and 'respond to court orders', and the like.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    This is the main purpose of the act tho. The license can be revoked at any time if the government determines that a network "disturbs the national peace".

    That's the point.

    Also, Chapter 12.1, line (h): only allows access to the platform after verifying the real identity of a person.

  • source
  • parent
  • 1 comment in c/worldnews@lemmy.ml view that post
    [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Coming soon to America...RIP.

  • source