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

171–180 of 295 posts

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#171

Post by insanitybit »

yucky wrote: post #169
insanitybit wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Yes because it's illegal. What exactly is illegal? None of what I have described goes through a legal process, there is no official judge saying "yep, that's spam" or "yep, that's malware". In general things are very murky with regards to what the legality around malware is - if it has not been used to access another system maliciously you're really going to have to stretch the CFAA (partly why the CFAA is so vague…

>just because something is not legally required does not mean that it's wrong to do it, so I don't see why the distinction even matters. Define "wrong" though. That's the problem, and why the distinction matters.

My point is that the distinction already doesn't exist. This is because it really doesn't need to exist for most cases - no one worth talking to is on the "actually malware should be legal and providers should be forced to host it" side of the argument. Where things get murky is the "Potentially Unwanted Program" ie: programs that really really suck, are kinda sketchy, but don't cross over into malware territory.

That's to say that there are grey areas, but there are also black and white areas, or areas that are so far on the fringes of grey that it's fine to just treat them as black or white. We do that all the time.

In the case of Kiwifarms we have what I think is a very straightforward case. A website that exists for the sole purpose of organizing malicious acts falls well into the "maybe it's not illegal, but it's blatantly unethical".

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#172

Post by dragonwriter »

DarkByte8 wrote: post #170

Can someone explain to me how 4chan which is in the news all the time linked to mass shooters, linked to Trump and 2016 election, link to misinformation, etc. is still up but kiwifarms is dropped by every company?

4chan has had... quite a lot of platforming-related drama, too.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#173

Post by crtasm »

soundnote wrote: post #146

“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Which laws are involved in this situation?

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#174

Post by luckylion »

insanitybit wrote: post #165
luckylion wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I'm not sure what your anecdote is supposed to contribute. Are you trying to say that because of your experience you don't believe that hosting providers take malicious content down? That doesn't even seem worth responding to, if so, especially as I have given anecdotes to the contrary.

They certainly don't do it reliably. You might have different access to them, and they listen to reports from you, or it's an "you need this many Twitter followers before we take reports from you".

Them removing malicious content "all the time" is certainly not something I've seen. I disagree with an argument that goes towards "they care and that's why they do it this way today".

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#175

Post by lamontcg »

sonoriyuu wrote: post #83
anaisbetts wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a KKK-level hate site against LGBT people and particularly trans women, that actively seeks to terrorize them by doxxing them and their family members. Several suicides have been attributed directly to their actions, as well as the Christchurch massacre.

The Christchurch massacre wasn't initiated by a KF user or initially streamed there. That happened on Facebook. KF "only" archived and reposted the video and manifesto by the Christchurch terrorist. This is illegal in New Zealand and the police asked KF to release the data of all NZ users commenting on the video, which JM refused to do since it's an overreach and they legally run under an US entity thus don't have to…

> KF "only" archived and reposted the video and manifesto by the Christchurch terrorist.

oh yeah, then they're totally fine...

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#176

Post by DarkByte8 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #172
DarkByte8 wrote: post #170

Can someone explain to me how 4chan which is in the news all the time linked to mass shooters, linked to Trump and 2016 election, link to misinformation, etc. is still up but kiwifarms is dropped by every company?

4chan has had... quite a lot of platforming-related drama, too.

Apparently not enough for cloudflare to drop them.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#177

Post by insanitybit »

luckylion wrote: post #174
insanitybit wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what your anecdote is supposed to contribute. Are you trying to say that because of your experience you don't believe that hosting providers take malicious content down? That doesn't even seem worth responding to, if so, especially as I have given anecdotes to the contrary.

They certainly don't do it reliably. You might have different access to them, and they listen to reports from you, or it's an "you need this many Twitter followers before we take reports from you". Them removing malicious content "all the time" is certainly not something I've seen. I disagree with an argument that goes towards "they care and that's why they do it this way today".

It doesn't matter if they do it sometimes or all the time or 90% of the time or whatever. The point is that they do it, they already take those actions and no one cries "censorship" because it's obviously a good thing that a malware C2 gets taken down.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#178

Post by sinity »

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.

I mean, such a thing happened multiple times at this point. Supporters of this aren't really ashamed of what they do.

I can't wait to support the other side being censored whenever it'll be possible somehow.

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#179

Post by cannabis_sam »

KF defenders are always the true “lolcows”!

Have they and/or their nihilistic and sadistic salivation over victims of harassment been made illegal…?

Turns out, no…

Are private businesses choosing not to service their reprehensible needs for irrelevant gossip legal…?

Turns out, yes!!!

You either die a free speech defender or you were always an irrelevant misanthropic shitbag who no one wants to associate with…

Your next step is to start a “free speech” oriented ISP, cause, you know, that is still not actually illegal.

You’ve been talking the talk, time to walk the walk…

Re: Kiwifarms Dropped by Their ISP

#180

Post by sinity »

simplotek wrote: post #88
Trumpi wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're somehow conflating not actively supporting a cause with censoring someone. No, I'm merely making the argument that spam control tools are not censorship because the user decides. I'm not sure how the paper supplier fits in to this argument. Perhaps it is a good analogy for the original topic.

> No, I'm merely making the argument that spam control tools are not censorship because the user decides. You stated no point. You're trying to ignore the fact that businesse relationships require all parts to participate voluntarily. If one part tries to abuse the terms of those services then service providers are free to not continue with the business arrangement. Not continuing a business arrangement is not censor…

> Are we supposed to feign ignorance and claim terms of service don't exist anymore?

Terms of service usually are vague bullshit which boils down to "we can drop you whenever we feel like it". And if it's an oligopoly? Well, too bad I guess. It's hilarious leftists support oligopolies now.

Post reply on HN