Live data from Hacker News

Distributed Denial of Secrets

ddosecrets.com

21–30 of 42 posts

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#21

[flagged]

I bet a lot of the people who signed up to that site were just white people interested in dating people similar to themselves without being accused of racism. It's funny how there are dating and e-commerce sites made for every race, nationality, and ethnicity but when it comes to whites it is considered pure evil. You can't really shame people out of their preferences, even by calling them names.

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has documented over 100 people killed in the United States and Canada in attacks committed by extremists linked to the white supremacist movement since 2014. google is your friend

So 10 per year across 2 countries? You know, Google also says that 20-30 people die of lightning strikes per year in the US alone. Lightning injury rates are higher still. The more you know!

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#23

[flagged]

If your ideology involves hurting people, to a point, you should be left alone by the government. but by that same principle, others should be left alone too when they show similar levels of hostility or worse. You shouldn't lose your fundamental human rights, up to a point, that point is when you start believing and spreading a belief that other people should lose their fundamental human rights.

If only it were that simple. People seem to have to constantly argue about what human rights actually are. They use free speech to argue for all kinds of censorship for example. Censoring and harassing people who think differently will rarely do more than make them angry. Philosophers even centuries ago figured out that free speech is a most essential freedom and must be nearly unlimited in a free society, but it's a constant struggle to maintain this ideal in the face of the fearful and easily offended.

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your ideology involves hurting people, to a point, you should be left alone by the government. but by that same principle, others should be left alone too when they show similar levels of hostility or worse. You shouldn't lose your fundamental human rights, up to a point, that point is when you start believing and spreading a belief that other people should lose their fundamental human rights.

If only it were that simple. People seem to have to constantly argue about what human rights actually are. They use free speech to argue for all kinds of censorship for example. Censoring and harassing people who think differently will rarely do more than make them angry. Philosophers even centuries ago figured out that free speech is a most essential freedom and must be nearly unlimited in a free society, but it's a…

Free speech is always “free speech under some limits set by laws”, “free speech absolutism” is nonsense (and is only being claimed by people who will censor everything without laws and due process at the instant when they reach power, see Trump and Vance who are currently imposing a censorship never seen in the US in peacetime, or Musk and Twitter).

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#25
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> These people are actively working towards genociding groups of people (Emphasis mine). No they aren't. Or rather some of them may, but many aren't. Many of them are just brainwashed terminally online dudes who believe progressive values are why they can't be happy. These people don't actively work towards anything, they are literal losers. (I have a family relative who's like that, he says he wants to build a Chris…

The road to new genocides is a core tenet of white supremacy. Denying that is like denying that Buddhists meditate. Maybe you need to ask yourself why you are consistently trying to defend people who stand outside my home shouting seig heil and want to murder me and people like me?

> why you are consistently trying to defend people who stand outside my home shouting seig heil and want to murder me and people like me?

I'm not.

These people are actively doing evil things, and should be dealt with.

But most of the people in these leaks aren't even “courageous” enough to do that. Most of them aren't actors, are lazy, idiotic bystanders who just happen to like what they see.

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has documented over 100 people killed in the United States and Canada in attacks committed by extremists linked to the white supremacist movement since 2014. google is your friend

[dead]

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has documented over 100 people killed in the United States and Canada in attacks committed by extremists linked to the white supremacist movement since 2014. google is your friend

So 10 per year across 2 countries? You know, Google also says that 20-30 people die of lightning strikes per year in the US alone. Lightning injury rates are higher still. The more you know!

[flagged]

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[dead]

I got that impression too. Gatekeeping sensitive information is not necessarily bad, but the entire thing is sketchy. For example, is it legal or ethical for this group to have Washington Post data that was leaked or stolen? Are we really supposed to be against something called "Free Speech Union" because of the owners having controversial views? There is clearly a political angle to most of the stuff I've seen at a…

Most evil groups have "good" and "innocent" names in order to attract a following. The "Worker's Party of Korea" sounds like a great party for all Koreans out there to vote on. Likewise, the "National Socialist German Workers' Party" sounds, on paper, like a great political party for the German labourers out there.

Unfortunately, both the WPK and the NSDAP are very evil organisations, with no real intentions of helping actual workers, but the names of their organisations wouldn't reveal that.

You can't look at the name of an organisation to find out what their values and hidden agendas are. Names are the most valuable assets in any effective propaganda, and should therefore be seen as completely untrustworthy.

The "Free Speech Union" don't just have "controversial views", they are actively spreading disinformation about COVID-19 vaccines.

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#29

Why I can't enter site? https giving ssl protocol error. http redirecting me to: http://MY_IP_ADDRESS/landpage?op=1&ms= http://ddosecrets.com/ I don't think that's the purpose of the site.

its blocked in Turkey i am surprised it opened after any amount of trying

Re: Distributed Denial of Secrets

#30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Nazi ideology is disgusting Disgusting is the least of its problems. I'm not saying this in connection to the privacy issue, it's just weird to see something like "death is icky, it smells bad". > I don't think being an asshole with retarded ideology is enough to lose your fundamental human rights. I don't know who is being doxed by WhiteLeaks, but again, the bigger problem is that doxing creates threats to persona…

The death of privacy is definitely a more fundamental issue here, outside of politics. In an ideal world, private citizens, even if they have notorious views, have a right to privacy.

> In an ideal world, private citizens, even if they have notorious views, have a right to privacy.

Privacy is definitely important, in an ideal world we'd like to have as much of it as possible but we are now in world that's far from ideal.

> The death of privacy is definitely a more fundamental issue here,

Well, my prior comment was about personal security and why it's so easily, and on so many levels, jeopardized by the lack of privacy. In that light, privacy isn't the more fundamental issue for sure.

We know that "security through obscurity" isn't the best way to get there, it's rough analogy but it does apply here too. The fundamental issues are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, we'd be in a very rough spot if high levels of secrecy were the only way to secure these.

Even under the best of conditions, secrecy has a limited reach and lifespan, it simply doesn't play well with liberty and happiness. So, there are more fundamental issues than privacy, and while more privacy is definitely an enhancer, it's just a knife in gun fight.

Post reply on HN