Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 433 posts

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#331

Post by learc83 »

bluthru wrote: post #309
learc83 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please read this summary of the conversation and tell me how your comment follows. paulgb: Lauren Southern was attempting to block ships. bluthru: No, she was just reporting on an attempt to block ships. learc83: No, she participated. Here's a quote from her saying she participated. bluthru: You can't inhibit human trafficking?

I apologize, I wasn't aware of that quote by her until you posted it, as I only watched her explanation. She definitely steps out of the lines of "reporter" when she said that. However, my question still stands: what law or policy did Lauren break?

Using her boat to physically block a ship from leaving the harbor and firing flares in that direction. That is definitely illegal.

The ship had no cargo at the time, but even if it was carrying tons of heroin and literal slaves, trying to block a large ship at night with a small boat is dangerous vigelantee behavior at best.

And it's most definitely illegal. Call the coast guard if you think something illegal is going on. The minute you start forcing ships to maneuver around you at night, your risking the lives on that ship and any ships they might hit trying to avoid you.

The rediculous part is that she was there to supposedly stop "human trafficking", but her and her boatmates were chanting "no illegal immigration" the entire time.

No one except these far right groups think that NGOs are working with smugglers to get people into Europe. And the far right groups don't care about it either as evidenced by what they were chanting and what they say on their website. They've just latched onto something they think they can use to justify their anti illegal immigrant stance.

There's no evidence of it. It's like an Italian renting a car and pulling out in front of trucks headed into the US because she says she thinks they might underage prostitutes in them.

It's not your job to enforce a foreign country's immigration policies, and it's definitely illegal to try to do it by endangering yourself and the crew of another ship.

The even more rediculous part is that the group she was working with has actually been accused of human trafficking after several of the crew of their ship requested asylum and said they paid to access the boat.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#332

Post by WikipediasBad »

Veratyr wrote: post #328
WikipediasBad wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mean coders on patreon itself? Any links to coder patreons I can look at? Or do you mean a new startup that's patreon for open source/coders? It would be really interesting to build a patreon platform tailor made for coders if the market for it is not already taken by patreon.

> Do you mean coders on patreon itself? Yes, they're on Patreon proper. Patreon isn't constrained to entertainment. > Any links to coder patreons I can look at? A few I know or Googled: - https://www.patreon.com/bcachefs - Works on a new filesystem - https://www.patreon.com/cemu - A WiiU emulation project - https://www.patreon.com/ShareX - An open source Windows application for sharing stuff - https://www.patreon.com…

Oh very cool. That's actually really legit and some of them are great projects/talented people. Patreon is definitely not for entertainment or the arts itself, but it does sort of have that vibe and the software's intuitive usage is built around content patronage instead of software patronage (understandably so). I wonder if patreon model can be disrupted for coding/software projects or if it's already too big and enough coders are happy with the current way it is.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#333

Post by PKop »

tanilama wrote: post #325
dna_polymerase wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "getting it right" in free speech. Either you allow free speech or you don't, if you are keeping one controversial thing but kick out the other you gave up on free speech. You can't kick someone out because you think its right and claim allowing free spech.

Free speech doesn't mean without consequence, you said nasty things people don't agree, they can choose to not offer you service, just like how restaurants do, and it is entirely within their freedom of speech.

That's not the point... the point is, these platforms get large & controlling, and become the only game in town (by their nature, network effects and all), and people will get sick of playing the game.

Decentralized uncensorable platforms will take their place, funded by currency that cannot by blocked.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#334

Post by PKop »

quxbar wrote: post #154
dna_polymerase wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "getting it right" in free speech. Either you allow free speech or you don't, if you are keeping one controversial thing but kick out the other you gave up on free speech. You can't kick someone out because you think its right and claim allowing free spech.

"People have indeed falsely shouted "Fire!" in crowded public venues and caused panics on numerous occasions, such as at the Royal Surrey Gardens Music Hall of London in 1856, a theater in New York's Harlem neighborhood in 1884,[1] and in the Italian Hall disaster of 1913, which left 73 dead. In the Shiloh Baptist Church disaster of 1902, over 100 people died when "fight" was misheard as "fire" in a crowded church ca…

The interesting point to think about is not restrictions on telling lies to incite panic & possible injury...

but rather, restrictions on telling the truth, such as outlawing shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater when there's actually a fire.

This is what defining "right think" means, where you have to confine your discourse to what is socially acceptable, whether or not what you're saying is true.

This is the real problem, and vague corporate or government policies outlawing "hate speech" are vague, subjective, Orwellian, and don't event attempt to assess truthiness or falsiness.. they appeal to hurt feelings. Which are always and forever in the eye of the beholder. A hecklers veto to ideas one disagrees with.

It's beyond scary that so many smart people here and around the country & world are perfectly fine to go down this road...

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#335

Post by Aeolun »

makomk wrote: post #290
seanie_patreon wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I'm a security engineer at Patreon. Like most companies we take security reports from folks via security@patreon.com and support@patreon.com. The dedicated security email is the quickest route to the security team. We also have an invite only HackerOne program where we've invited the top reporters on HackerOne. When folks send us a valid report via email we also add them to our HackerOne program for reward (we've…

While that's good to know, it's not me you should be telling this to now, it's this guy a few days ago: https://twitter.com/DMDeck16/status/889156464891371520 https://twitter.com/DMDeck16/status/890188665389010945

I dunno, it took me all of 20 seconds to go to their FAQ page and find the reporting email address for security issues (https://patreon.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115003872306-S...).

If this guy has been screaming into the void on Twitter waiting for an email address, then the problem is probably that he's using twitter.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#336

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

syshum wrote: post #282
specialist wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very libertarian (puerile) view of free speech. The rest of us understand principles like civility, that your rights stop where mine begin, don't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, balancing rights and responsibilities, and that hatespeech is a form of assault.

No "Hate Speech" is not a form of assault, nor should it be treated as such Further the entire concept of "hate Speech" is rife for abuse and is antithesis of Free Speech. How do you objectively define "Hate Speech", do you trust government to define this, that is a scary thought if you do...

"Government" in this context is not some well-defined cohesive autocratic whole.

The liberal democratic nations have separation of powers: legislature, courts, law enforcement, civil society.

Through these institutions we attempt to develop laws, regulations, and codes of conduct, that attempt to define acceptable behaviour, rights and responsibilities, protections, and punishments.

This is all in a constant state of flux, there is no end-point, no "this is how it is, for all time and places and circumstances".

We should probably, at a minimum, be vocal about what we believe and support.

There is no right answer here, only opinions, and attempts at persuasive argument. That's all we have.

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#337

Post by PKop »

specialist wrote: post #263
azernik wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very US-centric view of free speech. In many other (developed, democratic) countries, a lot of the shit 8chan does would be viewed as incitement to violence, hate speech, and/or invasion of privacy. The absolutist conception of free speech in the US is an outlier.

It's a very libertarian (puerile) view of free speech. The rest of us understand principles like civility, that your rights stop where mine begin, don't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, balancing rights and responsibilities, and that hatespeech is a form of assault.

"fire" in a crowded theater when there's no fire is not the controversial scenario.

It's when you yell "fire" in a crowded theater when there is a fire, and that is outlawed.

"Hate speech" is a hecklers veto on telling the truth. On speaking truth to power. On criticizing, mocking, disagreeing, debating about ideas, people, groups, political policies, governments, special interests, religions etc.. that are off limits from scrutiny and insult.

It has no limiting principle, is not well defined, is subjective to an absurd degree, and essentially nullifies the 1st amendment.. because almost anything controversial can be labeled hate speech. As if hurt feelings or even deplorable points of view are the ultimate crimes to be legislated against.

Throughout human history, when totalitarian regimes have oppressed millions of people, there was no limit to what could have been labeled hate speech when professing views against the government.

Free exchange and debate in a free marketplace of ideas should allow anyones stupid point of view to be presented and defeated / opposed, supported, agreed with, or not.

Why people should be outlawed from hating things that they want to hate is beyond me. Professing an opinion or belief about something or someone in and of itself should not be restricted, as long as their actions or presentation of said ideas is consistent with allowing others to do the same. So bullying and intimidation and other forms of such...no.

Freedom above all else. Give me liberty or death..

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#338

Post by Mindless2112 »

coredog64 wrote: post #267
specialist wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very libertarian (puerile) view of free speech. The rest of us understand principles like civility, that your rights stop where mine begin, don't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, balancing rights and responsibilities, and that hatespeech is a form of assault.

Yelling "fire" in a crowded theater and immediate incitement of violence are not allowed in the US either.

An example of speech that is actually illegal in the U.S. -- saying "[The President] ought to be killed. It is a wonder some one has not done it already. If I had an opportunity, I would do it myself." [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Threatening_the_President_of_t...

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#339

Post by [deleted] »

specialist wrote: post #263
azernik wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very US-centric view of free speech. In many other (developed, democratic) countries, a lot of the shit 8chan does would be viewed as incitement to violence, hate speech, and/or invasion of privacy. The absolutist conception of free speech in the US is an outlier.

It's a very libertarian (puerile) view of free speech. The rest of us understand principles like civility, that your rights stop where mine begin, don't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, balancing rights and responsibilities, and that hatespeech is a form of assault.

[deleted]

Re: Inside Patreon, the economic engine of internet culture

#340

Post by nyolfen »

specialist wrote: post #263
azernik wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a very US-centric view of free speech. In many other (developed, democratic) countries, a lot of the shit 8chan does would be viewed as incitement to violence, hate speech, and/or invasion of privacy. The absolutist conception of free speech in the US is an outlier.

It's a very libertarian (puerile) view of free speech. The rest of us understand principles like civility, that your rights stop where mine begin, don't yell "fire!" in a crowded theater, balancing rights and responsibilities, and that hatespeech is a form of assault.

people like you are going to bring back blasphemy laws. it's alarming to me how common your sentiment has become.
Post reply on HN