DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler • Hacker News Board

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#51

Post by StavrosK » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:50 PM UTC

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #46

StavrosK wrote: post #12

These goings-on make me very aware of the fact that I'm still not settled on the matter of free speech. I used to be very pro-free-speech, but on the other hand, I'm anti-fascism, and I don't know what's worse: Giving fascists a platform to spew hate, or set a precedent for potentially limiting my own speech down the line? It's nowhere near clear-cut, and I'd like to hear some opinions on this.

Bear in mind that there was never anything on Parler that wasn't on Twitter or Facebook. Cory Doctorow: https://pluralistic.net/2021/01/09/the-old-crow-is-getting-s... > It's reasonable to say that Parler should use a mix of automated tools and human judgment to block unlawful speech and/or hate speech - but it's NOT the reason that Appl/Goog have removed it. Both companies have made it clear in their public communic…

Sure, but, as I like to say, "defaults matter", and having to search long and hard to find the unpalatable content you want is much different than someone serving it to you on a plate.

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#52

Post by gruez » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:51 PM UTC

richardARPANET wrote: post #39

kube-system wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deplatforming is a freedom of association issue.

Or fear of the mob. We will be using DDoS-Guard going forward to show support for those with a spine.

Dunno that sounds vaguely like virtue signaling to me. Also, I'm personally not a big fan of a russian company MITMing my company's traffic.

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#53

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:51 PM UTC

wtallis wrote: post #43

richardARPANET wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite. > DDoS-Guard CEO Evgeniy Marchenko maintains the company has done nothing wrong, and that DDoS-Guard does indeed have a presence in Belize. So they acted without any investigation because "uh oh, here comes the mob".

The rest of the sentence that you improperly quoted: > DDoS-Guard CEO Evgeniy Marchenko maintains the company has done nothing wrong, and that DDoS-Guard does indeed have a presence in Belize. Which clearly does not support anything else in your comment, or rebut anything in the comment you're replying to.

[deleted]

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#54

Post by devrand » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:51 PM UTC

richardARPANET wrote: post #26

ericwood wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems pretty cut and dry; DDoS-Guard would need a physical presence there to operate, they didn't, so the IPs were revoked. The phone call was simply a tip to investigate.

Not quite. > DDoS-Guard CEO Evgeniy Marchenko maintains the company has done nothing wrong, and that DDoS-Guard does indeed have a presence in Belize. So they acted without any investigation because "uh oh, here comes the mob".

You're quoting a paraphrase of a statement from the CEO of the company about to get the majority of their IPV4 space revoked. Of course they're going to maintain that they're in the right.

Where did you find that LACNIC didn't investigate this?

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#55

Post by CyberRabbi » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #48

CyberRabbi wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you only allowed the speech you didn’t have a problem with, then you wouldn’t need the concept of free speech. On the other hand I hate all fascists too and they are violent terrorists so there is no point in pondering philosophy for their sake.

> If you only allowed the speech you didn’t have a problem with, then you wouldn’t need the concept of free speech. Well that's exactly the question: Is free speech more societally useful than disallowing the kinds of speech I disagree with?

Yes free speech is useful but not for fascists and their allies. Fascist speech is never okay.

The philosophers of the enlightenment didn’t foresee that freedom of speech would be exploited by racists for the purposes of promoting hate in a tolerant society. Freedom of speech is an outdated concept.

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#56

Post by gruez » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

g6587yd wrote: post #40

StavrosK wrote: post #12

These goings-on make me very aware of the fact that I'm still not settled on the matter of free speech. I used to be very pro-free-speech, but on the other hand, I'm anti-fascism, and I don't know what's worse: Giving fascists a platform to spew hate, or set a precedent for potentially limiting my own speech down the line? It's nowhere near clear-cut, and I'd like to hear some opinions on this.

Not letting others speak IS fascism.

Can I put up some "TRUMP LOST DEAL WITH IT"[1] signs on your front lawn? No? Then you're being a facist because you're not letting me speak.

[1] or if you're on the other side of the ideological spectrum, a "ABORTION IS MURDER" sign with pictures of bloody fetuses.

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#57

Post by ABeeSea » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

richardARPANET wrote: post #44

zimpenfish wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> anyone we label violent extremists should be completely and utterly deplatformed They've labeled themselves, though, by espousing violent extremist views.

extremist = anything you don't agree with

You were the first commenter on this thread. Your comment was removed because all you did was call Krebs a “loser.” Did he shut down your carding network or what?

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#58

Post by sleepysysadmin » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:53 PM UTC

squibbles wrote: post #10

> The pending disruption for DDoS-Guard and Parler comes compliments of Ron Guilmette, a researcher who has made it something of a personal mission to de-platform conspiracy theorist and far-right groups. While this may solve immediate problems (such as the planning of unlawful or otherwise socially harmful events), we should consider the long-term impacts of de-platforming. Does censorship, even if justified, fuel a…

[flagged]

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#59

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

ABeeSea wrote: post #57

richardARPANET wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

extremist = anything you don't agree with

You were the first commenter on this thread. Your comment was removed because all you did was call Krebs a “loser.” Did he shut down your carding network or what?

[deleted]

Re: DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

#60

Post by bjeds » Thu, Jan 21, 2021, 4:54 PM UTC

ryanlol wrote: post #23

bjeds wrote: post #9

The real story here I think is how LACNIC handled this. Who in their right mind will do infrastructural internet business in Latin America going forward if some self-righteous American man can cause them to revoke IP:s assigned to your company? There is no indication that this Russian internet provider - who claim they are operating in Belize - had a say in the revocation of this IP space. Looking at the website of D…

It’s interesting to see the kinds of mental gymnastics these threads attract from folks seeking to defend their favourite nazi site. LACNIC really fucked up by enforcing their rules that require you to actually be doing business in Latin America, how horrible!

This is so tiring.

I'm a Swedish man. Last time I visited the US was several years ago. I'm not particularly sympathetic towards Donald Trump or Parler. I'm definitely not here to defend nazism.

Not sure if it's intended, but if you intend to get sympathy and support for your cause (whatever that is) by calling me a nazi or implying my interest in internet infrastructure has anything to do with supporting nazism, then you are not gonna get very much sympathy from me.

So way to go with the polarization.