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

151–160 of 295 posts

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#151

Post by luckylion »

insanitybit wrote: post #139
byyll wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cho…

I've previously reported phishing and scams to sendgrid, aws and azure. Neither took the domains down.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#152

Post by yucky »

insanitybit wrote: post #139
byyll wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 cho…

>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.

Yes because it's illegal. Deadnaming a transperson might be mean but it's not illegal. If there are countries where it is illegal, then they could just do like China does to "protect people from offensive material" by banning sites in those locales.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#153

Post by yucky »

immibis wrote: post #133
sonoriyuu wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No post body was provided.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#154

Post by Shawnj2 »

josephcsible wrote: post #13
d_e_solomon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kiwifarms has gone way past free speech and onto active harassment. To fly this one as a free speech issue is disingenuous. To act like censorship is the issue here is pretty ripe.

Do you mean the legal definition of harassment, or just the colloquial one? If the legal one, then use the legal system to stop it instead of vigilantism. If just the colloquial one, then it is a free speech issue.

Cloudflare isn't required to host your site because you pay them money. Unless that changes, I don't see how they're in the wrong here.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#155

Post by immibis »

byyll wrote: post #75
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/…

Using your analogy with malware and spam, the users that do not want to read kiwifarms can choose not to by.. just not reading it. Or blocking it in their firewall or browser. Seems like it's a bad analogy.

How do you choose not to be infected with the malware?

If you're the recipient of a DDoS from malware, how do you choose not to receive the DDoS? Is it a violation of the malware author's free speech if you take down its C&C server to stop the DDoS?

Kiwifarms users do the real-life moral equivalent of DDoS, and Kiwifarms is a C&C server.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#156

Post by luckylion »

api wrote: post #42
lbruno wrote: post #39

i'm enjoying the right-leaning comments here -- it's not censorship, it's being censured 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 with examples which you can't post here because it goes against the rules of this place -- which should be a pretty big hint as to why the fruit site got censured

The right supports the right of private businesses to decide who to serve unless they are kicking out right wingers in which case we need government intervention to guarantee a platform. It’s sort of like how they support federalism except when states do things they don’t like, or small government except for when it comes to their pet issues.

The "support private businesses' rights unless I don't like their decision" is kind of universal, isn't it (okay, minus some libertarians)? Custom cakes for gay weddings was a case where probably everyone who now says "private businesses have no duty to serve you" said the opposite.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#157

Post by rvz »

sascha_sl wrote: post #84
josephcsible wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Cloudflare and several other ISPs will not drop you simply because a large volume of people complains. Yes they will. This is the example of them literally doing exactly that.

Then why are they still hosting several sites that people complain about it all the time too. Cloudflare loves providing services to Nazis as long as they don't get themselves associated with mass shootings too often in the same small time window (8chan) or your Infosec hire turns out to be associated with some of the Nazis who claim they have inside help to stay on Cloudflare. (Daily Stormer) Infowars is literally o…

So is Gab, and they are also using Cloudflare. They also have their own ASN and have been sitting on Hurricane Electric (HE) for years despite all the calls to 'deplatform' them, which like I expected Kiwifarms to move to Epik for their domain, they will also move to HE or elsewhere.

I guess Gab is not villain of the month to be deplatformed today.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#158

Post by boppo1 »

nyuszika7h wrote: post #130
boppo1 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Moon? Please loop me in. There is precedent for censorious tech conglomerates (reddit, at least) to defend people who are sex offenders. I'm no fan of Kiwifarms, but I'm also no fan of the DIY HRT guide Keffals runs that advises (often underage) people on doing home-chemistry to make hormones. Would be nice if the right could stop slandering every trans person as a mentally ill groomer and the left could stop labelin…

I don't think you should generalize people who support censoring hate speech as defending sex offenders. There may be a small group of people who happen to do both, but most of us who have better morals would generally give the benefit of doubt to victims when there's no credible refutal of the claims. I haven't been following this specific case though so I can't say any more than that. As for diyhrt.wiki, they added…

I didn't generalize, just acknowledged that it has and can happen. I don't think most platforms are running cover for a pedo ring or any of that common conspiracy stuff.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#159

Post by immibis »

dragonwriter wrote: post #60
josephcsible wrote: post #2

This is why arguments justifying censorship by saying "just host it yourself then" are wrong. Whenever you take over one level in the stack, the next level down will just censor you instead.

> Whenever you take over one level in the stack, the next level down will just censor you instead. That’s (among the reasons) why you need net neutrality, which covers the lowest level of the stack. EDIT: It is interesting that it is the same people that oppose net neutrality that tend to support government intervention at all other levels of the stack to assure that their preferred content regulation and only that c…

You can make this argument when it's someone's home connection being shut off. Until then, there's still another level.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#160

Post by areyousure »

geofft wrote: post #73
josephcsible wrote: post #53

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 That's not true, though. Remember this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_Am... David Goldberger, a Jewish lawyer, defended actual Nazis' rights to free speech. Do you think that he thought Nazism was justified?

No, but he happened to be wrong for it. The NSPA's goal was never to actually hold a march. They never did hold a march in Skokie, after that defense. Their goal was to harass Jewish communities through the process of applying for the march , which Goldberger, for all his good intention, assisted them with. As the article notes, they sent letters to a whole bunch of suburbs asking for a permit to hold a march. They n…

In case anyone is curious, the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Socialist_Party_of_Am... linked above suggests that the NSPA's goal was in fact to hold a march in Chicago and following the Skokie decision, they apparently did in fact hold a rally in Chicago.
Post reply on HN