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

Terminating Service for 8Chan

new.blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 1001 posts

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#221

Post by moate »

FemmeAndroid wrote: post #123
madamelic wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That doesn't mean they must block every potentially bad actor. Unfortunately obligatory "I don't support 8chan". I dislike this idea that people can stomp their feet and demand CloudFlare kick off "bad actors". Who is to say the bad actor of tomorrow won't be the "good actor" of today. CloudFlare and other internet utilities should remain apolitical tools that leave law enforcement to law enforcement (even that is a…

It's for each privately controlled platform to decide. If you want tools that are open for everyone, create a public utility that must comply with the first amendment.

Create and maintain "the Great American Message Board" the same way the government funds PBS. Sounds like a great idea to me.

Sad fact is, you can't expect any platform to do anything, assuming that it's not illegal for them to do and cost of doing it is less than the cost of not doing it.

If you're a platform, and your people say we'll lose 100 million if we do thing X or we'll lost 20 million if we do thing Y, the correct choice is do thing Y. You're still losing, but you're losing less.

Welcome to capitalism in the internet outrage era. Burning Nikes and demanding that Chik-fil-a not open on your campus are the decisions megacorps PR departments have to deal with. They don't care about you, singular human, and your views. They care about the net effect on their bottom line.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#222

Post by sysbin »

sagichmal wrote: post #192
sysbin wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Given that, this seems like a reasonable exercise of that power, and that's about the best we can hope for. Maybe, this event may become the precedent for all future hosting providers of unpopular opinions and where denial of service attacks become used against these hosting providers. Losing protection from anti-ddos service(s) becomes a process to eliminate the unpopular opinions being expressed. I think this is d…

It is disingenuous to describe white supremacy as "an unpopular opinion".

I think unpopular opinions from life experiences are what gravitates people to whatever categorization and or label is placed upon them.

Btw, the only reason I feel the needs to share my thoughts is because I have an unpopular opinion myself. Assisted death should become available for people that desire it. There are some sites I view that have resources for people that are ending their life and these sites suffer denial of service attacks. They started using cloudflare recently.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#223

Post by [deleted] »

kennywinker wrote: post #169
umvi wrote: post #34

It would be better if cloudflare terminated service for all media outlets. Every time you turn a mass shooting into a national spectacle, it inspires copycats in rapid succession as we've just seen. Mass shootings (generally) don't kill that many people. They are scary, yes, but not that deadly (statistically). Keep it local news, don't publish the name of the killer, basically keep the story away from the front line…

Every other country in the western world reports mass shootings in roughly the same way - yet shooting happen at a much lower rate per capita.

[deleted]

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#224

Post by ggggtez »

colejohnson66 wrote: post #100

CloudFlare is not a notice board. They are practically a utility. PG&E aren’t a government, and they can’t cut off your electricity because you’re an extremist. What about ISPs? Should Cox, Comcast, Frontier, etc be liable for what flows through their pipes? Media companies say yes, but what do you do when your ISP says “bye” because you visit 4chan? Go to another ISP? In most areas of the US, you can’t

>They are practically a utility.

How exactly does a person come to believe nonsense like this? The US government doesn't even argue that the internet itself is a utility. I know that net neutrality has been argued about extensively, but people seem to forget that neutrality lost.

Even trying to start a discussion from where you are standing is off to a bad start. You are ignoring reality from the get-go.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#225

Post by markbnj »

busymom0 wrote: post #211
roywiggins wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you filter spam if you can't moderate at all? HN only exists as a service because it's quite carefully moderated.

By treating it 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 bann…

You posted this exact thing above, there was no need to copy/paste it a second time.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#226

Post by manigandham »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #95
manigandham wrote: post #74

This decision is yet another distraction. It's attempting to treat an ephemeral symptom in a rapidly evolving landscape of digital identity and communications. Things are only getting faster, easier, more connected, more distributed, and more encrypted. There is no going back. Until we collectively acknowledge that it's real humans behind these actions and create modern ways to identify and prevent them, a DDoS/CDN c…

>Until we collectively acknowledge that it's real humans behind these actions and create modern ways to identify and prevent them Surely this has no downsides at all. For example, you can rest easy because YOUR ideas and YOUR opinions will never stray off the “approved” line. ... how is it people in tech can’t see past their own noses on things like this?

I'm definitely not on the "approved" line, but that's not what I'm talking about though.

Politics have little to do with it. Any base ideology can be extrapolated to a violent end and the signs are all the same. Recognizing those signs is where attention should be placed. Unfortunately the media and general consensus will be on political hysteria and surface outrage instead of investigating the root causes.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#228

Post by cambalache »

busymom0 wrote: post #207
Spivak wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fo…

Go open an ice-cream shop and refuse to serve Asian people because you dont like them.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#230

Post by colordrops »

BoiledCabbage wrote: post #162
umvi wrote: post #34

It would be better if cloudflare terminated service for all media outlets. Every time you turn a mass shooting into a national spectacle, it inspires copycats in rapid succession as we've just seen. Mass shootings (generally) don't kill that many people. They are scary, yes, but not that deadly (statistically). Keep it local news, don't publish the name of the killer, basically keep the story away from the front line…

> Mass shootings (generally) don't kill that many people. They are scary, yes, but not that deadly (statistically). Keep it local news, don't The problem is there is a simmering domestic nationalistic terrorism threat to the country - and that is news. The killer in TX directly referenced it, as did very many of the prior mass-murders of recent. That is noteworthy, and fundamentally different from people killed in a…

Can you cite evidence for this? My understanding is that deaths due to mass shootings hasn't really changed since the 70s, but rather the media coverage has expanded.
Post reply on HN