Terminating Service for 8Chan • Hacker News Board

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#201

Post by samstave » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:50 AM UTC

illuminati1911 wrote: post #177

samstave wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am completely against not publishing the name of the shooter. I want to know who these shitbags are. I want their entire family shamed. Who was the shitty ass parents who raised the murderer? Who were his failed doctors or teachers of friens who failed to help prevent. I want to know every god amn detail about this person.. Look at vegas. Look at the failed police/FBI/CIA/whatever investigation that has provided ZE…

I this sarcasm? I honestly find it hard to believe someone would post something like this on HN seriously.

Then youre an idiot to think that after being on HN for over a decade and paying attention to stories from the full spectrum that somemone on HN is going to compartmentalize so fucking hard against a major flaw in our society.

Look at your username - and you dont think that someone who has been online since 1993 and on HN for as long as I have isnt going to pay attention to the shit that is going on in our world.

Give me a break. I speak my mind on HN - and have for many years. Sometimes Dang gets mad at me - but I participate in this community daily for more than a decade. and I pay attention.

There is something shady going on. and its all related to epstein and his dead mans switch.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#202

Post by umvi » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:51 AM UTC

tomlockwood wrote: post #175

cyberferret wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know why you are getting downvoted. It is the same here. Every time I see a US city name in my Twitter sidebar here in Australia, I just know that it is another mass shooting without having to click. I hate that it has become so common now that I have just stopped clicking to find out more about them. This sort of thing used to horrify me, but nowadays I just feel so numb about it, and that scares me because…

I also wonder if Americans who think this is a problem with the media inspiring more shootings would take the same tack on reporting terrorist incidents. Wouldn't it make sense to say we shouldn't report on them, given that attitude? I'm a US/AU dual citizen and I've visited America quite often over the last few years, and it feels like we hear about the shootings only very slightly less in Australia than in the US.…

> would take the same tack on reporting terrorist incidents. Wouldn't it make sense to say we shouldn't report on them, given that attitude?

I had a muslim coworker recently self-radicalize with online ISIS videos and attempt to carry out a truck attack against national harbor. It didn't make it out of local news because the FBI nabbed him a few hours before the attack was to take place.

I think that's a good thing. If the media blew it up, no doubt it would have inspired others to try the same.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#203

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:51 AM UTC

basementcat wrote: post #144

madamelic wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When I was younger I thought I was a few speech absolutist. Then I went to where was free speech was absolute and saw what was discussed. Now I favor moderation. How do you determine what speech is "good" and what speech is "bad"? I feel like there is no absolute way to determine this. (I am being genuine in asking, I want to know what caused this change and how you see "free speech") All speech is good in my opinio…

> All speech is good in my opinion. Some actions are bad. 8chan is supporting these actions, they've crossed the line. It looks like you've just made a determination of what you consider is bad speech.

[deleted]

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#204

Post by Erudire_Genius » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:52 AM UTC

madamelic wrote: post #110

ALittleLight wrote: post #91

When I was younger I thought I was a few speech absolutist. Then I went to where was free speech was absolute and saw what was discussed. Now I favor moderation.

>When I was younger I thought I was a few speech absolutist. Then I went to where was free speech was absolute and saw what was discussed. Now I favor moderation. How do you determine what speech is "good" and what speech is "bad"? I feel like there is no absolute way to determine this. (I am being genuine in asking, I want to know what caused this change and how you see "free speech") All speech is good in my opinio…

[dead]

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#205

Post by sytelus » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:52 AM UTC

This is the same argument cake shops make against taking order from gay people. I do believe that so-called manifesto is mind-numbingly dumb, fact-free and it is dangerous in the sense it will inspire more violence against innocent people. But that precisely what makes it a good test case for asking some fundamental questions. Can commercial businesses with deep reach, pricing power and critical function deny services based on their ideology and beliefs? The legal answer is yes and that only looks troublesome when you think of how tables could turn in future. As someone has mentioned what if Comcast started permanently black listed you if you visited a website that didn't aligned with their ideology? What if airlines refused to fly you because you said something on Twitter that didn't aligned with their beliefs?

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#206

Post by 420codebro » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:52 AM UTC

Rebelgecko wrote: post #83

icpmacdo wrote: post #23

"the speed with which tech cos change after a bad PR cycle seems like solid proof that none of this is abt principles but abt trying to keep from making hard choices as long as possible. earlier today they argued that keeping 8chan within its network is a “moral obligation”" https://twitter.com/cwarzel/status/1158193462459506693

Cloudflare in the past was a staunch defender of free speech when people tried to get them to take down a website that was an outlet for pro-ISIS propaganda (I think the quote from the CEO was "A website is speech. It is not a bomb"). When they stopped hosting the neo-Nazi website they mentioned in the link, they made a big deal about how it was a one-off decision and they'll never again again stop serving a website…

I think it is funny (inconsistent) how one Jew-hating crowd is cool in their eyes, while another Jew-hating crowd is totally unacceptable.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#207

Post by busymom0 » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:53 AM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #164

shapiro92 wrote: post #93

Very unpopular opinion. The internet should be free for everyone and no provider should have the ability to cut off services. The problem is not the platform but the people, hate the player not the game.

You should be legally required to do business with any customer? At some level does a person not have the right to say, "I don't like you and won't take your money?" Sure, the US and others have protected classes that limit the reasons you can refuse to do business with someone but those are more to do with people in those classes being unfairly burdened and facing difficulty living tier day-to-day lives.

> You should be legally required to do business with any customer?

No you shouldn't be. But this should also be treated fairly.

Communications Decency Act of 1996, Section 230 allowed platforms to not be held liable for user generated content. But it did not allow publishers to have the same freedom.

Notice the very important distinction between "platforms" vs "publishers".

A publisher like a newspaper can be sued for content they put out. A platform cannot be sued for the same. When companies like CloudFlare start banning people for political reasons, they are stepping into the "publishers" market and should be stripped off of the protections from the CDA Section 230. We should be allowed to sue them for content they carry.

Right now, they are enjoying the benefits of both - platform and publisher.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#208

Post by madamelic » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:53 AM UTC

basementcat wrote: post #144

madamelic wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>When I was younger I thought I was a few speech absolutist. Then I went to where was free speech was absolute and saw what was discussed. Now I favor moderation. How do you determine what speech is "good" and what speech is "bad"? I feel like there is no absolute way to determine this. (I am being genuine in asking, I want to know what caused this change and how you see "free speech") All speech is good in my opinio…

> All speech is good in my opinion. Some actions are bad. 8chan is supporting these actions, they've crossed the line. It looks like you've just made a determination of what you consider is bad speech.

Hah. I had to re-read your post + delete my original reply rejecting that.

You got me. ;) I guess I am not as absolutionist as I thought.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#209

Post by [deleted] » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:53 AM UTC

jquery wrote: post #156

I'm pretty sure more Twitter and Facebook users have become mass killers than 8ch users. The first comment to the guy on 8ch who posted the manifesto was "hello FBI". Not a 8ch user but they don't appear to support shootings. I'm more familiar with 4chan shenanigans and they definitely don't support it, with any threat of real-life violence being met with something along the lines of "[alphabet agency] fuck off". Not…

[deleted]

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#210

Post by cambalache » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 2:53 AM UTC

Spivak wrote: post #164

shapiro92 wrote: post #93

Very unpopular opinion. The internet should be free for everyone and no provider should have the ability to cut off services. The problem is not the platform but the people, hate the player not the game.

You should be legally required to do business with any customer? At some level does a person not have the right to say, "I don't like you and won't take your money?" Sure, the US and others have protected classes that limit the reasons you can refuse to do business with someone but those are more to do with people in those classes being unfairly burdened and facing difficulty living tier day-to-day lives.

> You should be legally required to do business with any customer?

Ceteris Paribus? Yes, absolutely, this should be a foundational rule of society. And here, Ceteris Paribus means paying your hosting bills on time and obeying the law.