No post body was provided.
Blocking Kiwifarms
251–260 of 1001 posts
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#252Quoted post unavailable.
When private companies start having so much power they can literally make or break voices from being heard at all, this argument of "private companies are private therefore they do what they want" becomes much harder to defend. I'm eager to "educate" myself about how this kind of things, truly.
Then work to get some laws passed outlining what private companies can and cannot do in the new internet age. Until there are legal guidelines, they are free to use their own discretion. If "Big Tech" doesn't want your content, you're free to set up your own server.
https://www.google.com/search?q=free+speech+censorship+first...
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#253I hope we can all join hands and say "DDOS'ing is a crime and we all hope that the FBI finds people participating in DDOS attacks and put them in jail."
That shouldn't be controversial right?
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#254Seems to me it would be better for Cloudflare to keep serving Kiwifarms, and cooperate with government requests for access logs / etc. Then at least our law enforcement would have data to help with finding threat actors.
they did, but law enforcement were simply too slow. > However, as the pressure campaign escalated, so did the rhetoric on the Kiwifarms site. Feeling attacked, users of the site became even more aggressive. Over the last two weeks, we have proactively reached out to law enforcement in multiple jurisdictions highlighting what we believe are potential criminal acts and imminent threats to human life that were posted to…
>law enforcement were simply too slow
"too slow"
According to whom? Cloudflare? What would be an appropriate time for Cloudflare for law enforcement to respond? And to what threats?
You say "simply" but these are not simple questions.
Cloudflare can shut off service to anyone, sure, but in any other industry there would be some termination notice, right? Unless its something like terrorism, where LAW ENFORCEMENT sets the boundary, not the private company.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#255There 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 in our society. They are forced into that position by woefully inadequate governance by legal authorities operating multiple decades behind the current landscape. That's not what happened here. They made an appropriate decision. It's not a difficult to say, "while we have no policies that restrict lawful content, we reserve the right to not serv…
>Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#256Cloudflare is a private busniess and can refute service ofc, but should the owner not get some notice of the termination to move to another service in time?
You mean coverage in mainstream media outlets and the angry mob wasn't enough of a canary in the coalmine for their non-biz?
Literally, they just point their domain at new DNS. It takes seconds.
Who is going to want to do biz with KF?
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#257There 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…
This was not a free speech issue and I suspect that some of the attempts to reframe it that way are deliberately muddying the waters.
The issue at hand is that Cloudflare was providing material support to terrorists.
The site at the center of all this wasn't merely being critical of a group of people, it was being used to gather and disseminate personal information and coordinate acts of terrorism. Cloudflare meanwhile is not a public utility and had absolutely no obligation to provide services to terrorists; that was a smokescreen meant to deflect criticism of their decision to do so.
Free speech absolutists should really consider whether their argument is being strengthened or weakened by this specific case before hitching their ideological wagon to it.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#258I am a free speech absolutist, but I read the Wikipedia page on this site and it seems bad. "Crimes were committed," "People lost their lives" bad. Unjustifiably bad. That said, is anyone willing to steelman this website? Could this possibly be construed as just a big misunderstanding?
No post body was provided.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#259Never heard of kiwifarms before but after having a quick read on it, I don't see any reasons why any provider of any sorts would deal with them. Not sure how screwed up in their heads people need to be to engage in this kind of shit.
No post body was provided.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#260The people who pushed for this have a list of the next sites they are going to get taken down. In particular any place TERFs have discussions.
I give it 2 years and they will be successful.