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

DDoS-Guard to forfeit internet space occupied by Parler

krebsonsecurity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 327 posts

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

#241

Post by deno »

jackinloadup wrote: post #146
unnouinceput wrote: post #86

Deplatform enough people, regardless of their views, and all you do is fasten the Splinternet. Currently we have China as one big separate internet with gatekeepers for communication with outside world. Then we have the big internet giants that are tightening their walled gardens even more. I don't like the future, it looks bleak.

Agree, I'm wondering when they start going door to door removing peoples "right" to be on the internet due to their beliefs. It seems the silent stick has finally come to the US and likely the whole world by extension/association.

It has already been happening in UK for some time. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/arrests-offensive-face...

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

#242

Post by Number157 »

sonotathrowaway wrote: post #121
grayfaced wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too soon to say on this current round. But it's generally considered to have been an effective strategy in dealing with Isis and Al Qaeda. But that was a combined campaign to eliminate recruitment by de-platforming, and eliminate existing membership militarily. It's possible de-platforming these domestic groups will just further radicalize the existing members. But it should inhibit their growth.

There’s good data to show that deplatforming did wonders for Reddit in reducing the amount of hate speech and harassment that flowed across their platform. Similarly, deplatforming 8chan has done wonders in reducing the amount of mass murderers they inspire. I think a dispassionate analysis would dispel the idea that it’s not effective, and most such arguments are fueled more by emotion than objective facts.

Every time I open reddit there's harassment and hate speech right on the front page.

It's just happening against people the reddit admins hate and "good hatred" doesn't count.

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

#243

Post by vaduz »

azinman2 wrote: post #101
_wka6 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Well they may not exist in some very literal sense because they lost the war and their gov no longer exists, but it’s very easy to find sympathizers who have plenty of their memorabilia, fly their flags, use their salute, and take the ideas into modern times with things like a “Camp Auschwitz - Staff” sweater…

> [..] take the ideas into modern times with things like a “Camp Auschwitz - Staff” sweater

This one sadly becomes quite ironically hilarious when you realise that a significant portion of the "staff" was made out units of prisoners themselves... In other words, anyone who wears a sweater like that has no damn clue what he is talking about.

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

#244

Post by JumpCrisscross »

GoblinSlayer wrote: post #235
klyrs wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Attacking the capitol building got LOTS of attention by a lot of people. It was an extremely conspicuous, highly publicized crime. So yeah, folks are looking into the people involved, and their associates. Much of enforcement relies on the public to notice and report wrongdoing.

If you don't like the government, you make your own, no? How is it a crime? It's a suggested action.

> If you don't like the government, you make your own, no? How is it a crime?

Because the Insurrection Act of 1807 [1] says it is.

Less bluntly, the point of democracy is to give people peaceful means by which to affect their government. Storming the Capitol is not a peaceful mean.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurrection_Act_of_1807

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

#245

Post by ABeeSea »

kart23 wrote: post #223
ABeeSea wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These groups are already generating social conflict. De-platforming ISIS from Twitter and YouTube worked to stop their massive growth of new members through propaganda. There is no reason to believe it won’t also work on American right-wing terrorist and Christian terrorists. “Capitol Hill Attack Video Shows Rioters Pray With Lifted Hands After Violating Senate Chamber” https://faithfullymagazine.com/capitol-hill-att…

False equivalence. Look, I know where you're coming from. But 99% of ISIS members would be tried and convicted of terrorism because of hard evidence showing intent to kill. 99% of right-wing people are not going to be convicted of terrorism. Sure, there are some that are making serious threats and have shown intent to follow up on said threats, but believing in conspiracy theories and weird cults isn't a crime. I'm o…

I never said the entire right-wing is terrorists. The militia groups and q-anon recruit right-wing Christians to extremist causes in the same way ISIS recruited right-wing Muslims to extremist causes. In both cases, they use propaganda and recruitment tactics to radicalize a segment of these groups. They even target the same demographic of disillusioned or aimless young to middle-aged men.

The radicalized militias like oathkeepers, 3%ers, vanguard, proud boys, etc are serious threats.

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

#246

Post by JumpCrisscross »

kart23 wrote: post #223
ABeeSea wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These groups are already generating social conflict. De-platforming ISIS from Twitter and YouTube worked to stop their massive growth of new members through propaganda. There is no reason to believe it won’t also work on American right-wing terrorist and Christian terrorists. “Capitol Hill Attack Video Shows Rioters Pray With Lifted Hands After Violating Senate Chamber” https://faithfullymagazine.com/capitol-hill-att…

False equivalence. Look, I know where you're coming from. But 99% of ISIS members would be tried and convicted of terrorism because of hard evidence showing intent to kill. 99% of right-wing people are not going to be convicted of terrorism. Sure, there are some that are making serious threats and have shown intent to follow up on said threats, but believing in conspiracy theories and weird cults isn't a crime. I'm o…

> 99% of ISIS members would be tried and convicted of terrorism because of hard evidence showing intent to kill. 99% of right-wing people are not going to be convicted of terrorism

ISIS being a foreign terrorist group, the U.S. can criminalise membership. Extremists being a domestic group, mere association can’t be criminalised [EDIT: is difficult to criminalise]. Only individual actions can be criminally pursued.

Other than that legal distinction, the two groups (right-wing extremists, not all right wing Americans, and bona fide ISIS members, not everyone in ISIS-occupied territory) are comparable. They spread their misinformation similarly. And could be expected to be similarly curtailed by deplatforming.

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

#247

Post by JumpCrisscross »

aww_dang wrote: post #209
plugger wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1. I must admit I find it a bit rich that people are raising free speech issues around this situation. I find myself wondering where these people were in 2014 when all the major social media platforms systematically removed ISIS accounts and content from their systems. I don't recall anyone lamenting that move and the chilling effects it had on free speech. In fact, iirc the response was quite the opposite.

Is it possible to use a more extreme generalization than ISIS? On one hand you had ISIS posting beheading videos. On the other you had grandmas posting selfies in the rotunda. Yeah, there are some nutters out there. But to claim that everyone caught up in the tech purges is somehow equivalent to ISIS seems a bit rich from my perspective. Even if you accept that some of these people are genuine domestic terrorists, re…

> Is it possible to use a more extreme generalization than ISIS?

Sitting in New York, nutters who came within yards of hanging the Vice President, Speaker of the House and potentially several Senators are a far more clear and present danger than mullahs in the Middle East.

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

#248

Post by ABeeSea »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #246
kart23 wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False equivalence. Look, I know where you're coming from. But 99% of ISIS members would be tried and convicted of terrorism because of hard evidence showing intent to kill. 99% of right-wing people are not going to be convicted of terrorism. Sure, there are some that are making serious threats and have shown intent to follow up on said threats, but believing in conspiracy theories and weird cults isn't a crime. I'm o…

> 99% of ISIS members would be tried and convicted of terrorism because of hard evidence showing intent to kill. 99% of right-wing people are not going to be convicted of terrorism ISIS being a foreign terrorist group, the U.S. can criminalise membership. Extremists being a domestic group, mere association can’t be criminalised [EDIT: is difficult to criminalise]. Only individual actions can be criminally pursued. Ot…

> ISIS being a foreign terrorist group, the U.S. can criminalise membership. Extremists being a domestic group, mere association can’t be criminalised. Only individual actions can be criminally pursued.

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse suggested RICO’ing the militia groups today. The members could be criminally liable even if individual actions can’t be proven (similar to how the mob was taken down.)

https://mobile.twitter.com/SenWhitehouse/status/135238211274...

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

#249

Post by [deleted] »

ABeeSea wrote: post #248
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 99% of ISIS members would be tried and convicted of terrorism because of hard evidence showing intent to kill. 99% of right-wing people are not going to be convicted of terrorism ISIS being a foreign terrorist group, the U.S. can criminalise membership. Extremists being a domestic group, mere association can’t be criminalised [EDIT: is difficult to criminalise]. Only individual actions can be criminally pursued. Ot…

> ISIS being a foreign terrorist group, the U.S. can criminalise membership. Extremists being a domestic group, mere association can’t be criminalised. Only individual actions can be criminally pursued. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse suggested RICO’ing the militia groups today. The members could be criminally liable even if individual actions can’t be proven (similar to how the mob was taken down.) https://mobile.twitter…

[deleted]

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

#250

Post by zimpenfish »

gfodor wrote: post #204
CyberRabbi wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, they must be punished for their violent extremist seditionist views. They are a threat to our society. It’s called the “paradox of tolerance” the intolerant do not deserve rights because they have labeled themselves as intolerant.

You should go actually read what Popper said about the paradox of intolerance, instead of projecting your own interpretation onto it based upon your assumptions. Edit: here, I'll do it for you: "Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant,…

> People who use this paradox to try to suppress speech that isn't directly connected to violence

In your quote from Popper, he doesn't tie the suppression specifically to violence, does he?

"they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument" isn't a violence related criteria; merely "they insist on arguing in bad faith". Or "they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive" which is basically predicting the "FAKE NEWS" crowd; again, not specifically violence related.

("and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols" is, I think, an extra clause rather than a conjunction to the rational argument clause.)

Post reply on HN