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

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#941

Post by heurisko »

initplus wrote: post #455
eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading 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 has been engaging in mass harassment for years and is responsible for multiple suicides

> Speculation about the ‘trigger’ or cause of a suicide can oversimplify the issue and should be avoided. Suicide is extremely complex and most of the time there is no single event or factor that leads someone to take their own life.

https://www.samaritans.org/about-samaritans/media-guidelines...

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#942

Post by gcr »

ed_voc wrote: post #872
notatoad wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>rather than free speech i encourage anybody who is calls themselves a "free speech advocate" to consider what kiwifarms has been doing to "free speech". their intimidation campaigns have been doing a lot more to harm the cause of free speech than this decision by cloudflare is. if you really believe in free speech, you understand that trans people deserve free speech too, and kiwifarms harrasment campaigns have been…

There seems to be a double standard with who can partake in intimidation campaigns. Before any mention of keffals in Kiwifarms she was running a harassment campaign against Destiny, making false accusations that he was a rapist and rallying their followers to get him de-platformed on all platforms. The worst situation is having one sided intimidation campaigns where trans activists can de-platform users like Destiny…

To this day Kiwifarms still hosts the Christchurch video.

They posted the AU Government’s takedown order along with their response: “were a US company,” refusing to remove it.

You can still find it by searching for “AU Government Class 1 Security Kiwifarms”

They clearly want to keep this content up.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#943

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

lupire wrote: post #467
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we shouldn’t be the ones making that call, and no one else who should was stepping up in spite of being aware of the threat If one patron starts beating another to a pulp, the bartender breaking up the fight does not signify a failure of the rule of law or law enforcement. You stepped in to help. It would be nice if you were given official air cover to do so. But I and most Americans prefer a system where the gover…

The governments have had years to deal with kiwifarms and its criminal users, and failed.

The criminals are the ones impersonating KF users. They swatted a government official in their attempt to get rid of the site.

Giving in to them is allowing domestic terrorism.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#944

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

initplus wrote: post #455
eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading 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…

No post body was provided.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#945

Post by _-david-_ »

ShowsAlone wrote: post #372
debacle wrote: post #176

I 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?

This is the individual that visited Keffels. He admits it: https://archive.ph/ksqln

If the individual also said they were a HN user would you be thinking HN is guilty?

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#946

Post by devwastaken »

humanistbot wrote: post #232
devwastaken wrote: post #131

Cloudflare would do better to simply stop making posts every time they do something. Every other company bans users every day and have learned to stop talking about it. Or the inverse. Regardless of what cloudflare does, right or wrong, there will be mobs of people responding negatively and positively to it. People love drama. If their policy was "we'll ban anyone we want for whatever reason." I'd respect that more b…

So transparency is bad?

With the amount of illigal content on the net, CF is not making blog posts every time they stop service. They're doing it in this case because kiwifarms is popular. And now it's causing dozens of posts stirring drama and steering users towards it.

The justifications are also weak, and put CF in a bad light because they believe themselves to be justice. A simple "we don't like what they're doing so we won't service it" is an honest answer.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#947

Post by depr »

Longlius wrote: post #717
eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading 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…

Tell me then - why does Cloudflare still offer its services to drug dealers? To sites run by terrorist groups like ISIS? To outright criminal scamming operations? I have no faith in your principles. From my perspective, the only principle you have is your share price. That's fine, of course. I don't expect you to stick your neck out or risk your business. But don't pretend like this is some principled stand.

Do you think their stocks would drop in value if they removed drug dealers and other illegal ventures?

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#948

Post by dannyw »

I am extremely disappointed in the actions taken by Cloudflare. As a $NET investor, I have sold my stock.

The underlying infrastructure of the internet must remain infrastructure: as pipes sending bits and bytes.

Today, it's Kiwifarms. Tomorrow, it is an end-to-end encrypted messenger that doesn't have a backdoor.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#949

Post by LawTalkingGuy »

nematode_tech wrote: post #627
eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading 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…

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#950

Post by rubyist5eva »

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #610
cft wrote: post #344

Well I run a service with 100 million registered users and this is why we don't use Cloudflare. We use VeriSign BGP DDoS mitigation which is more expensive than Cloudflare (about 27k per year with our traffic) but i don't have the luxury of losing the business on a Saturday afternoon on a whim of an anonymous Cloudflare censor, their lawyer or even his Majesty Matthew Prince Himself making a preemptive liability deci…

I don’t know about you but I’m more likely to pay money to a company that deplatforms content appropriately over one that does not.

Appropriate to you.

Politics is a pendulum, and it won’t be pretty when it swings back.

Post reply on HN