Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

t.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 295 posts

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#131

Post by geofft »

bigshell wrote: post #63
d_e_solomon wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We keep seeing actions from Kiwifarms that include doxing, swatting,and cyber bullying that lead to the suicide and death of people. If you're saying that swatting is free speech, then we've pushed the idea of speech beyond all reasonable boundaries and have decided that speech just means that people are free from consequences of their actions.

Have you visited this website? I have. I found what I assume to be doxes which you have to log in to the website if you'd like to view, but that's factual information, why is the statement of factual information so heinous that this website must be taken off the internet? I saw some pretty mean things, but nobody was saying that you should go say these things on other people's profiles, they just kept these mean thin…

In general "factual information" is not a defense to a whole bunch of things that society generally recognizes as not protected by free speech (the broad concept, not solely the legal right). I cannot claim to be lawyer and provide you with legal advice, even if that legal advice is correct. I cannot redistribute copies of Taylor Swift's latest album, even if (perhaps especially if) it is a faithful copy. I cannot make a public list of all the black people at my company who show up late to work and leave the white people off that list, even if I'm accurate about when they're showing up. If I am a doctor, I cannot publish transcripts of all the conversations I have with patients.

And a few of these aren't even heinous! If I happen to be self-taught in the law and I am particularly good at giving wise and helpful legal advice, but I am not actually admitted to the bar, nobody is directly hurt by my advice, but society has decided the potential for harm in this situation is high enough that I still shouldn't be allowed to do that.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#132

Post by FeepingCreature »

geofft wrote: post #87
FeepingCreature wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which highlights a point i like to make: if you wish to defend KF, first you have to justify the concrete speech being carried out on it Speech does not require justification any more than any other right does. As a principle, speech is not for something. So I in fact have to neither justify nor endorse KF to consider this wrong.

Then how do you decide what is (or should be) a right and what is not? Suppose someone claims a right to gay marriage, or a right to employ only people of their race, or a right to bear arms - how does society (the citizenry, the legislature, and/or the courts) decide whether that is indeed a right? Absent a holy constitution given to us by the divine, the way we decide what is and isn't a right is we look at its eff…

I mean, we could try using the democratic process, that seems to have worked reasonably well so far.

But you're right that I hold free speech to be a right for its own sake. So it's that I first believe that to be a right, on grounds of personal preference, and then I advocate for it because of that. But obviously I cannot convince someone on that basis - though that goes for pretty much every preference.

That said, I think the particular issue here is that the abrogation of the right of free speech created by this action did not come about through any particular instance of the democratic process, and is not actually based on any process of formally weighing rights against one another, but rather who can threaten to cost companies the most revenue.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#133

Post by immibis »

sonoriyuu wrote: post #129
immibis wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you support Kiwifarms on free speech grounds, I absolutely don't see how you could fail to support a DIY HRT guide on the same free speech grounds.

The production and distribution of medication is regulated, and minors are a protected class of citizens. These are the two major issues with DIY HRT guides.

But surely if you have a problem with the distribution of information about how chemicals are produced, you should also have an issue with, you know, deliberately driving people to suicide by making their lives hell. One seems worse than the other.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#134

Post by immibis »

orangepurple wrote: post #124
immibis wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last I checked, Kiwifarms was accessible intermittently on Tor and it contained pretty much the content described. What if it's not a targeted harassment campaign and the site really is evil?

Quoted post unavailable.

No post body was provided.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#137

Post by FeepingCreature »

simplotek wrote: post #81
FeepingCreature wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two wrongs don't make a right. If Kiwifarms is acting illegally, sue them in court. If there are no laws, lobby to make them. ISPs are not police, elected representatives or courts; they shouldn't be allowed to usurp that role.

> Two wrongs don't make a right. If Kiwifarms is acting illegally, sue them in court. If there are no laws, lobby to make them. No ISP is compelled to provide services to the likes of kiwi farms. If there are no laws, lobby to make them. You have no right to force others to cater to your personal whims, specially if they are objectionable.

Fair enough. That said, consider my comment part of this process. :)

edit: I guess my disagreement with the idea of "forcing others" is primarily that I don't consider companies past a certain size worthy of having a right of free expression.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#138

Post by josephcsible »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #119
insanitybit wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't see that argument a lot. I'm glad their ISP dropped them. "Censorship" is a bit of a silly word to me at this point. Is it censorship when your email provider removes spam? When your antivirus removes malware? I mean, spam is speech, malware is code and code is speech. So it is censorship. We just all agree it's a good thing. This is a good thing. edit: Since this keeps coming up, it's not just spam emails/…

Sure. And soon the argument devolves into 'just run your own ISP'.

Yep. And even that ends up not working, because even when you are an ISP, you need to peer with or get transit from other ISPs.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#139

Post by insanitybit »

byyll wrote: post #122
insanitybit wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. Those who host malware and spam domains have them taken down. It's not just about a user receiving a spam email, it's also the fact that when a domain is being used to distribute malware the hosting provider will remove them.

That's not the case. There are a lot of hosting providers and reverse proxies that will gladly host malware and their upstream ISPs (which this thread is about, not hosting) will not block them. But what happens instead is they (either domains or IPs) get added to lists of phishing or malware enabled by default on most clients (browsers). Google has Safe Browsing and SpamHaus is probably the most popular spam list. I…

Malicious domains, users of email services for spam purposes, etc, get removed by their hosts all the time. That's simply a fact, I have made or been involved with the process as I work in security. There are some providers that are more cooperative than others, and certainly lists like Safe Browsing exists as well to deal with that + they can be more false positive tolerant.

My point is that these providers make choices about the content that they host all the time. They do this because some content is just bad. Kiwifarms tipped too far into "bad" and got removed, just like malware would get removed, just like spammers get removed.

Visiting a site, accidental or otherwise, isn't relevant.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#140

Post by sascha_sl »

boppo1 wrote: post #71
geofft wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Moon" is the name of the person who spoke the thing above that is being discussed in this thread. Advising underage people through a wiki on how to make hormones at home is neither sexual assault nor grooming as the term is conventionally understood. How could it be? You can't get in contact with an anonymous reader of information that has been published to the public. You have no idea what they do with that informa…

>...example of free speech Well, you have a point there. But if any of the screenshots of the 'catboy'(?) discord are real... I think there's probably a line being crossed.

If you had any interest beyond repeating hearsay, you could have stumbled upon keffals addressing this head on.

Attempting to associate LGBT people with pedophiles is as old of a smear tactic as gay people being visible in public.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSqJddReAjg

Post reply on HN