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

Blocking Kiwifarms

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 1001 posts

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#91

Post by Icathian »

donohoe wrote: post #71
Icathian wrote: post #40

There were no good choices for Cloudflare here, and everyone across the internet who jams their fingers in their ears and shouts their position repeatedly is just contributing to the problem. Private companies should not be the de facto moderators of free speech in our society. They are forced into that position by woefully inadequate governance by legal authorities operating multiple decades behind the current lands…

Private companies should not be the de facto moderators of free speech Hate speech and organizing to harass and other IRL hate acts is not ‘free speech’. That was the major point.

I do think, if there was competent legal governance in this space, that's the conclusion they would have reached. I think you understand my larger point, regardless.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#92

Post by cowtools »

donohoe wrote: post #71
Icathian wrote: post #40

There were no good choices for Cloudflare here, and everyone across the internet who jams their fingers in their ears and shouts their position repeatedly is just contributing to the problem. Private companies should not be the de facto moderators of free speech in our society. They are forced into that position by woefully inadequate governance by legal authorities operating multiple decades behind the current lands…

Private companies should not be the de facto moderators of free speech Hate speech and organizing to harass and other IRL hate acts is not ‘free speech’. That was the major point.

>Hate speech in the United States cannot be directly regulated by the government due to the fundamental right to freedom of speech protected by the Constitution. While "hate speech" is not a legal term in the United States, the U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that most of what would qualify as hate speech in other western countries is legally protected free speech under the First Amendment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United_Stat...

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#93

Post by spacephysics »

donohoe wrote: post #71
Icathian wrote: post #40

There were no good choices for Cloudflare here, and everyone across the internet who jams their fingers in their ears and shouts their position repeatedly is just contributing to the problem. Private companies should not be the de facto moderators of free speech in our society. They are forced into that position by woefully inadequate governance by legal authorities operating multiple decades behind the current lands…

Private companies should not be the de facto moderators of free speech Hate speech and organizing to harass and other IRL hate acts is not ‘free speech’. That was the major point.

What is hate speech?

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#94

Post by dougp1399 »

BgSpnnrs wrote: post #39

What the hell is this travesty. Now any old nobody can kill a site by larping drama on fucking twitter. You should all think about the people dying in dictatorships before you give up a free and open Internet over some paedophile using twitter clout to ban a gossip forum

No post body was provided.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#96

Post by sroghorhgr »

smcl wrote: post #65
_vvaw wrote: post #3

Quoted post unavailable.

> to the extreme extent he mentions Hey just FYI - Keffals is "she", so "to the extent she mentions". edit: to downvoters - original comment was referring to Keffals as "he", it was later updated to pretend it was referring to the owner of KiwiFarms.

No post body was provided.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#97

Post by MBCook »

serf wrote: post #41

>The policy we articulated last Wednesday remains our policy. >have our cake and eat it too. I don't get this corporate reverse speak. They literally went against the policies stated on Wednesday and then plainly say "But this violation of that policy doesn't reflect on our policies overall." I get that Kiwifarms is hated, that doesn't make black turn to white and up turn to down. Cloudflare reneged on everything the…

As I remember the policy they posted had exceptions for sites that were dangerous/etc. I think what they did today is completely consistent.

What I DON’T get is why they didn’t think the site was dangerous last week. When I read their policy it seems to clearly state they wouldn’t work with a group like kiwifarms, and yet they posted a whole post explaining why they were.

I agree it’s a flip-flop, I guess I see it from the other side.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#98

Post by donkarma »

makeee wrote: post #48
Test0129 wrote: post #31

Quoted post unavailable.

How is this censorship? They are a company and can do business with whoever they please. They are drawing the line at imminent threats to human life. The site has already led to the deaths of multiple people: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms#Suicides_of_harassm...

the actual deaths in this post have nothing to do with kiwifarms and the one that did (Near) was disproven to have even happened in the firstp lace

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#99

Post by [deleted] »

smcl wrote: post #54
BgSpnnrs wrote: post #39

What the hell is this travesty. Now any old nobody can kill a site by larping drama on fucking twitter. You should all think about the people dying in dictatorships before you give up a free and open Internet over some paedophile using twitter clout to ban a gossip forum

This wasn't "larping drama" - KF members went to pretty severe lengths to not just dox people but to show up at their houses and SWAT them etc.

[deleted]

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#100

Post by ocdtrekkie »

This is probably a worst case scenario for Cloudflare here. I'm generally in favor of them and I agree with their abuse policy they posted the other day.

But now twice Cloudflare has posted they won't moderate content, and then two days later done... exactly that while posting that they don't like doing it.

For folks concerned about abusive and harmful internet behavior, Prince has made it clear he doesn't feel responsible to take action and will avoid doing so as much as possible. And for folks concerned about free speech and censorship, Prince has made it clear he can be pushed around with enough pressure (regardless what the post says, it's how it will be read).

Cloudflare could've arguably taken either position with some level of righteousness, but by essentially caving to both, he proves himself to neither.

Post reply on HN