Pavel Durov

And if you include all kinds of content that we remove, all the accounts, groups, channels, posts, that would amount to millions of pieces of content every week, hundreds of thousands every day.

And then somebody would read the newspaper, get enraged because they would read something about child porn, and this is a subject that is very emotionally charged, and start doing something not based on data and logical thinking and laws, but based on emotions driven from inaccurate input.

And what is that experience like?

In France, they have this role of investigative judge.

I don't think you have it in many other places in the world.

It means I'm not on trial.

I'm being investigated.

And in France, it's not just the police or prosecutor asking me questions.

It's the judge.

which in my experience is more like still a prosecutor, but it's called a judge.

And that makes it harder to appeal.

So if you're limited in, say, countries where you can travel, then to appeal that restriction will take you a lot of time.

The investigation itself should have never been started.

It's an absurd and harmful...

way of solving an issue as complicated as regulating social media.

We did last year, I believe.

We are still not even given a hearing date for the appeal.

because the process is painfully slow, not just for me, but for everybody, which made me realize the system may be broken in many levels.

by very unnecessary actions of investigative judges that ended up being unjustified and biased.

And in the end, you can perhaps solve it when you reach a higher court and you'll get justice.