Let me see if I get this right, they were not hosting KF, they are blocking them via other services like DNS etc?
Blocking Kiwifarms
471–480 of 1001 posts
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#472Good. I'm sorry, I'm generally Mr. "Raw raw free speech", but let's not kid ourselves; by all accounts KiwiFarms is (and always has been) a cesspool of horrible people. It's not like 4chan or something, where it might have started with reasonable intentions and just became horrible; KiwiFarms was started for the specific purpose of bullying Chris-Chan, hence why it was initially called Cwcki Farms. KiwiFarms has been…
actually it hasn't been implicated in any suicides and I implore you to stop saying shit that you've heard from some random bloke
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#473The 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.
They really don't. Keffals, who has been spearheading this effort, has effectively been the target of hate from this one site which has stalked her across two continents . As far as I can tell she just wants to be able to live a normal life without worrying that taking a picture or posting a tweet could be used by this organized mob to figure out where she is and fuck with her life. It's worth noting that she's based…
>TERF
Is this a new buzzword to blanket a group and opinions? Something like "I dont think transgenders should compete in elite sports" would now label me a TERF. All these defenitions are made up on one side and can change on a whim.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#474Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…
Kiwifarms should have been dealt with by the traditional legal system years ago. It is honestly shocking to me that the operator has never been charged. The site has been engaging in mass harassment for years and is responsible for multiple suicides. When the legal system fails, people turn to vigilante justice, and we get this mess instead. People feel so strongly that Kiwifarms should be taken offline that they eng…
The site and the person who host it (there is no legal entity involved here - just a person) have not done anything other than facilitating speech, which is heavily legally protected. The users of the site have done a lot, though.
The proper action would be to go after the users who do bad things, and bury the site operator in subpoenas to find these bad actors.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#475Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…
Watching company employees consistently pop up on critical threads (not fingering CF here, many including at least Stripe come to mind as frequently occurring too) feels a lot like gaming the forum. Vetted messages like this from a recognizable source will often end up pinned to the top of the thread, but I don't really think they overly contribute to the conversation in most cases, and I find myself wishing there wa…
It's pretty easy to, you know, scroll down.
Companies in this position are damned if they do, damned if they don't. I for one at least appreciate thoughtful, substantive responses from company leadership in company-specific threads, and I'm happy that at least on HN we are more likely to be given a real, substantive response than the corporate drivel that is shoveled to most other media outlets.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#476And, just like that, the internet lost one of its most staunch defenders. I don't care for KF nor did I used to care about 8chan or stormfront, but it just shows that all the grandstanding from Matthew Prince was for show all along. and the worst of all? its fro nothing, the people doing whatever they were being accused of, which i'm still trying to piece together, are just gonna be in discords or the nth-chan that s…
I imagine you have never been the target of a KF abuse campaign.
"Everything I dont like should be instantly disconnected"
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#477Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…
It’s nonsense this has anything to do with the law.
This solely happened because of mainstream media pressure and significant clients moving or threatening to move away from Cloudflare and the board deciding they don’t need the bad press and loss of customers and nothing else.
You provide a service and like every service provider you have a TOS/AUP. The issue is the Acceptable Use Paragraph is clear as long as the content isn’t Copyright or CSE then it’s fine as you will absolve yourself of any responsibility.
No other CDN/WAF tolerates nationalists who threaten people, Cloudflare does. No other CDN/WAF makes the reporting process essentially doxing yourself to the threatening website. Cloudflare does. No other CDN/WAF intentionally puts all the most vile sites on dedicated CDN hosts so they get DDoSed while the normal customers don’t.
It’s purely so then when the vile sites get DDoSes then they use those learnings to improve the controls for all customers.
Much like providing security guards for a Proud Boys rally. It’s an intentional business decision to provide those services. You could chose not to. But you don’t.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#478Earlier quoted context omitted.
What was the actual threat? Was it posted on Kiwi Farms, or transmitted via another channel?
+1, what was the thing that changed today vs a week ago? If this is going to eventually become precedent (despite what is said this is now the new basis from which other decisions are made) other site owners and future one’s should have an idea of what exactly wasn’t dealt with. Cloudflare’s reach is extensive and becoming a critical part the internet so there’s plenty at stake here. The lack of transparency by Googl…
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#479Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…
Watching company employees consistently pop up on critical threads (not fingering CF here, many including at least Stripe come to mind as frequently occurring too) feels a lot like gaming the forum. Vetted messages like this from a recognizable source will often end up pinned to the top of the thread, but I don't really think they overly contribute to the conversation in most cases, and I find myself wishing there wa…
I have to disagree with this. These folks are best positioned to give us actual information. 90% of the rest is just opining.
Re: Blocking Kiwifarms
#480> 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 the site. I’m sorry, but what? Few thoughts: 1. Cou…
> That is imo a breach of contract
Point me to the breach you believe exists.
> You’re hijacking their website and saying “read our content” instead.
They have their domain pointed to their servers. As soon as HateFarms points their DNS elsewhere people will no longer get that message.