Live data from Hacker News

ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

eff.org

391–400 of 1001 posts

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#391
post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm all for freedom of speech, but forums dedicated to driving people to commit suicide go far beyond that. The claim that Kiwi Farms is a forum "dedicated to driving people to suicide" is patently false. It is rhetoric created by people campaigning to get it removed without due process by painting its owner and users as cartoonish villains. Kiwi Farms has thousands of threads discussing people from all ends of the…

The site is literally about stalking people and documenting their personal lives for the sake of mockery. The users are cartoonish villains, and I'm not sure how you'd get any other impression after spending a few minutes there.

> The site is literally about stalking people and documenting their personal lives for the sake of mockery.

You're half right, though I'd disagree with literally stalking — at the very least, there's variety and nuance. There's such a large variety of people discussed on the forum that I don't think you can make a blanket statement like that.

Is watching every video or stream from a content creator and posting in a forum mocking them "stalking"? Is digging through someone's old Twitter posts stalking? Is noticing that a person used the same username on multiple websites (some potentially embarrassing) stalking? Kiwi Farms defense is that it's all publicly available information, often published by the people they're mocking.

That's not to say that I agree with or cosign their behaviour. All I'm saying is that there's a large chasm between what people think Kiwi Farms is and what it actually is.

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think attacking and maligning someone else while ignoring the substance of their comment is what HN should promote in their comments.

Attacking and maligning people is kind of Kiwifarms' whole deal. Plus maybe a bit of stalking thrown in for good measure.

Still not an excuse to do it in kind.

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#393
post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or if the IRS investigates the President's political opponents.

Forget the IRS, imagine if the President himself were to withhold American resources promised to foreign governments in exchange for dirt on his political opponents.

and then force the country to fire the top prosecutor who was investigating his son's illegal activities, truly imagine if such person would do something like that and then have the audacity to publicly brag about it knowing full well the media would cover for him due to his political party.

truly sickening what politicians will do.

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#394

What I'd like to figure out is how there are still so many Nazis despite readily-available facts that Naziism is racist delusions? And how are countries like Germany still doing kinda okay despite making it illegal to do Nazi stuff? Isn't it a slippery slope directly from banning Naziism direct to North Korean-style authoritarianism?

For one thing the "Nazis" in the US aren't actual Nazis no matter how much they desire to be. German has banned things that deal with the ACTUAL, real Nazis which were a part of Germany. Germany hasn't banned racism and the reality is that Germany is quite racist. If judging by US standards Germany would be off the charts racist. Even Berlin, Germany's most diverse city is still > 80% white.

Are you saying that a city having a large majority of one ethnicity is racism?

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#395
post #241
post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So are bars. Should the electric company deny service to biker bars?

Do you really want the answer, or was that a question hoping to shame me? So if the biker bars are distributing child porn, or illegal drugs or guns, or using it as a place for conspiracy terrorism, then yeah, I say yes those corporations serving said bar should have a say. Particularly if the biker bar, e.g., violated the company's Christian morals. More importantly, this is supported by case law, today. The decisio…

> More importantly, this is supported by case law, today.

The Supreme Court ruling was not on using religion as an excuse not to serve. Supreme Court ruling was an about the commission violating a rule on religious neutrality. It set no precedent for the substance of the original suit.

> I would bet a significant amount that if an electric company didn't want to serve a biker bar on religious grounds (particularly if there was active criminal activity), they probably would get away with it.

You would be wrong. Electricity is not “creating expression”, which is what the lower courts were ruling on.

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Yeah, sheesh. KF is a website that gleefully reposts terrorist murder videos treated with the same legal penalties as CSAM in other countries, and during the reign of ISIS and the Taliban I don't recall people sitting around defending the need for that particular free speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms#Christchurch_mosque... edit: By the way, for all those people ripping on the ACLU and saying "they los…

[flagged]

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recall reading the other day about Germany making deadnaming a crime..

From an outsider's perspective (NZ) Germany's democracy looks a lot healthier than the US's.

That’s orthogonal. You can have a “healthy democracy” by killing FPTP, the two party system, and other things like that.

You can still have an intellectually unhealthy society subject to groupthink and stagnation if you make it illegal to say many things.

Re: ISPs should not police online speech no matter how awful it is

#399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, sheesh. KF is a website that gleefully reposts terrorist murder videos treated with the same legal penalties as CSAM in other countries, and during the reign of ISIS and the Taliban I don't recall people sitting around defending the need for that particular free speech. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms#Christchurch_mosque... edit: By the way, for all those people ripping on the ACLU and saying "they los…

[flagged]

> If you don't like it, don't read it. It's really that simple.

If there's a thread on the site about you, this isn't an option.

Post reply on HN