821–830 of 841 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Controversial -- particularly amongst those of a particular political persuasion that supports a terrorist state -- doesn’t mean preposterous.
We get it - everyone you disagree with is a terrorist. You can stop commenting now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SWIFT refused to shunt out the Brazilian banks that kept providing services to the public figures involved on the Bolsonaro trial last year.
"Brazilian banks" were never classified as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. It is a specific designation and law that comes with 20 year prison sentences.
Everyone’s missing the big picture here which is that this targeting of infrastructure providers as “terrorists” is unprecedented and concerning: https://decode39.com/16319/autistici-inventati-case-sets-a-n... If a radical group sets up shop on I2P, are I2P users and devs now terrorists? This is a problem. What about Monero users/devs? Veilid? Tox? Signal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Antifa is not centrist
Is antifa in the room with us? Who is he? If opposition to fascism isn't centrism then what is?
An Oregon leftist and antifa ideologue seeking to stop Immigration and Customs Enforcement was arrested on Feb. 4 over a manifesto and weapons procurement plan detailing his desire to stalk federal agents at the Portland ICE facility to their homes and kill them. - https://www.ngocomment.com/p/leftist-extremist-arrested-over...
33 anti-Israel protesters get slap on the wrist for causing $1M in damage to U. of Washington science building - https://nypost.com/2026/03/04/us-news/33-anti-israel-protest...
A German interior minister and author for "Das Antifa Magazin" said asylum seekers should have the right to vote after 6 months on German soil, and called for mass censorship - https://www.bild.de/politik/inland/politik-inland/auslaender...
Stabbing black conservatives - https://thepostmillennial.com/andy-ngo-reports-no-prison-tim...
Mobs physically attacking political candidates - https://www.lefigaro.fr/faits-divers/bordeaux-un-candidat-rn...
Making people who condemn arson unemployable - https://reason.com/2021/06/15/daniel-elder-cancel-culture-ch...
On the night of July 4, 2025, 11 members of a North Texas Antifa cell carried out a coordinated attack on the Prairieland Detention Center. Earlier that day, they had conducted reconnaissance (including reporting on security of the facility), and had assembled a cache of dozens of firearms. The group planned the attack ahead of time, including a “gear check” where the leader discussed bringing rifles and ominously “not getting arrested.” They dressed in black uniforms and brought 11 firearms, body armor, and military-grade first aid kits (including tourniquets for gunshot wounds). They disabled CCTV cameras at the facility, and threw fireworks and explosives to flush the officers out for a planned massacre. When officers called 911, Lt. Thomas Gross responded. Bodycam footage shows one of the attackers yelling “get to the rifles!” as the group opened fire. Gross was shot once in the neck, with the bullet exiting through his back, but survived and continued to fight back. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Prairieland_ICE_detention...
Beating leftists with clubs for the crime of carrying the US flag on US soil - https://www.newsweek.com/antifa-violence-portland-bernie-san... (The article comes with a nice photo! Can you spot any antifa in that photo, or will you continue to play dumb?)
I can keep going. If you're not convinced I can make a new post with 10x as many incidents. But it is true that there's no central antifa office with paperwork listing all their members. Nor is there one for white nationalists, but I don't see anyone arguing that doesn't exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As I said to your first comment: positive arguments rooted in what is aren't terribly compelling when the government has gone off the rails (unfortunately). https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49480377
Can you elaborate? The positive argument being that the law and judiciary disagree with you? The court decisions was 15 years ago when Obama was president btw.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Just like financial services are forced to KYC, there would have to be some similar provision. To echo what you said to the other poster, that does not follow: 1. Simply repealing Section 230 would not create some kind any novel "know your poster" legal requirement that doesn't previously exist. 2. Most sites would not have any incentive to do it either, since knowing the original author's identity would not shield…
What doesn't follow? Who said we should repeal section 230? Or to do so without replacing it? Not me, I said I was ambivalent about it; don't put words in my mouth. My words were: "there would have to be some similar provision [to KYC]". Similar, not the same. Not nothing. Everything else sounds like you imagining/speculating about what some future provision would look like. And your imagined fears don't play into my…
Does a company moderator need to review every post? That might be feasible for a low-population community, but it can be expensive.
But let's assume that's the protocol. A post is submitted and reviewed by a moderator. How does the moderator know if the post violates a law? Is the moderator a lawyer with knowledge of all laws? If not, every post is a roll of the dice for paying unpredictable fines or the end of the business.
Without Section 230, any lawyers' advice for hosting user content would be simple: "Don't."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s all about mens rea. The law distinguishes between people who provide services to anyone, and people who intentionally market their service to criminals, even under coded language. In this case the provider didn’t just allegedly market themselves to them; they also actually excluded others.
Fair, I guess, although again I’m uncomfortable with how the PKK link appears to be used as an excuse for political suppression. I think in cases like this, it would be best to order the provider to discontinue services to the specific entity in question before resorting to sanctions, since they provided services to other political groups that were not listed as “terrorists”. I’m not sure if we have any information a…
Criminal organizations tend not to care what their lawyers think around behaving well; they primarily seek them out for cover after they're already in trouble.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Either you wanted to be sarcastic or your simile did not work well.
That simile captures perfectly the logic here. I don't think it's technically sarcasm EDIT: a better simile would be if guns were giving away for free. You can see how that could be construed as increasing the responsibility of the provider if a receiver then does something illegal with it
I'll repeat a few of similes I used, with this latest: somebody giving guns away for free would be /less/ responsible if he screened the receivers first; somebody serving drinks would be /less/ responsible if he checked the costumers first; somebody in possess of a hammer would be /less/ responsible if he lent it to known vetted people instead of just anyone...
I get it that some see that cases for the opposite exist, but I would need a strong example because those provided made me strengthen the view I advanced instead of seeing an acquired responsibility on those who select their customers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Anything like what? The blogs, or the sanctions?
A movement that openly supports "Palestine" and gets surprise when they get sanctioned.
This group's been sanctioned and persecuted and prosecuted on a smaller scale many times for hosting speech. I think this is the biggest so far, but by no means unique.