8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service • Hacker News Board

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#191

Post by idlewords » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:36 PM UTC

o_p wrote: post #180

This is a ridiculous witchhunt, 8chan is a platform for many different boards with different opinions, the media framing it as a right-wing white supremacist forum makes wonder if its ignorance or malice, /leftypol/ is probably as big as the /pol/ boogeyman, and thats just politics which is just a part of the rest of the boards. No one is asking to close Facebook because Tarrant uploaded his shooting video there, why…

The media will tend to focus on the part of any site that promotes and radicalizes participants into mass murder.

Facebook, as you know, moved extremely aggressively to remove the NZ shooting video, along with other extremist content. Basically Facebook employs a raft of people to prevent the thing that 8chan was trying to encourage.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#192

Post by happytoexplain » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:36 PM UTC

shiado wrote: post #167

LargeWu wrote: post #120

Can any free speech absolutists explain to me the legitimate public interest that is served by allowing terrorist breeding grounds like 8chan to continue to operate?

One man's terrorist rhetoric is another's glorious revolutionary thought. If you don't think that the precedents being set today won't affect leftist spaces which seek to alter America's failed state version of capitalism you are truly naive. Was the Patriot act and subsequent rights degrading laws about combating Islamic terrorism? Or was it about legalizing oppressive control and mass surveillance?

I'm fairly leftist and would have no problem with individual leftist spaces being shut down if they start breeding so much hatred against the right that they incite and celebrate many explicitly-politically-motivated mass murderers.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#193

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:37 PM UTC

jredwards wrote: post #32

commandlinefan wrote: post #20

I’m old enough to remember when Howard Stern, as quaint as that seems today, was considered one of the greatest threats to civilization and had to be “de-platformed” before he could successfully destroy society - and the reasoning they used against him was _exactly_ the same as this reasoning: “he, himself (8chan, itself) is not going out and doing horrible things, but he’s encouraging people to go out and do horribl…

I think there's a pretty big gap between making dick jokes and encouraging mass murder.

[deleted]

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#194

Post by Pigo » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:37 PM UTC

CydeWeys wrote: post #76

We wouldn't tolerate the existence of an Islamist site that glorified and helped perpetrate mass incidents of terror against our society. What 8chan is doing is exactly the same, minus the Islamist part, yet there's hypocrisy in how they're treated vs e.g. the social media wing of ISIS. These people are trying to kill as many of us as possible. In no way should society accept it. It's simple societal self-defense. Ro…

Fahrenheit 451

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#195

Post by voodooranger » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:37 PM UTC

LargeWu wrote: post #120

Can any free speech absolutists explain to me the legitimate public interest that is served by allowing terrorist breeding grounds like 8chan to continue to operate?

i don’t have a strong opinion about free speech but i think the argument is: who gets to decide what’s “in the public interest”. if you don’t like somebody’s book, pamphlet, blog post, comment, or tweet, just declare it “not in the public interest”. there you have the makings of tyranny.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#196

Post by dd36 » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:37 PM UTC

mythrwy wrote: post #183

This might be an unpopular opinion for those who view more rules as the answer. Banning (or discontinuing or deplatforming or whatever you want to call it) may do little but harden the resolve of key ideologues of whatever stripe. For them, it leads credence to the idea that there is conspiracy against the group afoot. Besides, when has banning actually been effective? Sure, it may reduce manifestation and reduce rec…

The ideologues are already very well hardened. White supremacy isn’t a new ideology.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#197

Post by DrDimension » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:37 PM UTC

buildzr wrote: post #105

CydeWeys wrote: post #76

We wouldn't tolerate the existence of an Islamist site that glorified and helped perpetrate mass incidents of terror against our society. What 8chan is doing is exactly the same, minus the Islamist part, yet there's hypocrisy in how they're treated vs e.g. the social media wing of ISIS. These people are trying to kill as many of us as possible. In no way should society accept it. It's simple societal self-defense. Ro…

> We wouldn't tolerate the existence of an Islamist site that glorified and helped perpetrate mass incidents of terror against our society. Speak for yourself, I would. I've downloaded and distributed ISIS propaganda videos before out of sheer intrigue. Just because someone says something you don't like doesn't mean you should ban it. Of course, this will be downvoted to hell because this is a hot topic at the moment…

Isn't it funny how every post here that argues against censorship is being down-voted to the point of invisibility?

To me, it goes to show that there is no limit to the censorial impulse.

That should tell you something.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#198

Post by ergocoder » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:37 PM UTC

LargeWu wrote: post #120

Can any free speech absolutists explain to me the legitimate public interest that is served by allowing terrorist breeding grounds like 8chan to continue to operate?

Not a speech absolutist. I believe certain kind of speeches should be banned.

What irked me is that CloudFlare was the one who makes the decision to do censorship.

It's not really a due process. No one argue for the defendant's side. It would seem better coming from US court through a due process or something like two lawyers arguing for both sides and etc.

I dislike the rationale of "CloudFlare is a private company. They can do whatever they want" ... like wut?

Also, if what those people do is illegal, should we arrest them, instead of merely banning the site?

This is the same thing with Trump's speech on Twitter. People yelling at Twitter to ban Trump because what Trump said is very very bad. If it's so bad, he should be arrested, not simply banned from Twitter.

------------

Edit: to address the main concern in my replies.

So, we think the speech is so bad that CloudFlare should ban it. But it is not bad enough to be banned by every CDN. That sounds contradictory.

For me, the speech is bad and it should be banned by every CDN. But government should make the judgement on the speech through a due process, ban it, and arrest someone if there's illegal activity involved.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#199

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:38 PM UTC

egypturnash wrote: post #136

the8472 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

8chan is a platform allowing any kind of legal content. Pol is just one of them. You also have technology and comic book discussion for example.

So imagine you own a bunch of ponds and let groups of people use them. Some people use them for breeding goldfish. Some use them for canoe races. Some for swim meets. But one of the biggest ponds you own lies still and stagnant. A perfect place for mosquitos to lay their eggs. In fact you’ve managed to make it especially hospitable to mosquitos that carry malaria. And all your other ponds are next to it, all your oth…

[deleted]

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#200

Post by idlewords » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 6:38 PM UTC

romaaeterna wrote: post #174

If we're going to have internet censorship, I don't want it to be a backroom thing. It needs to be transparent, auditable, appealable, with bright line rules and due process guarantees. It's unfortunate if we need to live with some level of censorship. But I don't accept it being carried out in back rooms by unaccountable companies operating hand-in-hand with illegal DDoS attacks. Put it out there in the open, and le…

Speaking as someone who runs a public site with the discretion to ban accounts, no thanks. Due process means people will game your policies. We've had arbitrary internet censorship by site operators since day 1 and it works pretty well.