Terminating Service for 8Chan • Hacker News Board

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#341

Post by ViViDboarder » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:30 AM UTC

tenpies wrote: post #238

Iv wrote: post #79

Tor's onion service will always there to provide hosting to the less popular ideas. The censorship-resistant network is there. Make sure to give it some love. Last time I checked, people were discussing how to murder, exchanging nazi manifestos and conspiracy theories. I was looking for anarchist discussions but I actually ended up having these on reddit. Don't get fooled by the current positioning of IT firms, it on…

> I actually ended up having these on reddit I am actually quite surprised how complicit the media is in not reporting what goes on Reddit. It's the one place on the "mainstream" internet I run into where you can see calls for political assassinations in default subs, sub-reddits devoted to theft, ethno-nationalism, terrorism, and all sorts of content that makes 4chan seem tame in comparison. Then there is the huge c…

If reported, Reddit (the company) will usually moderate or shut down subs like those. Recent example being what they just did with /r/T_D.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#342

Post by jijji » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:30 AM UTC

it seems like a marketing message about cloudflare... I'm sure most people don't know what "cloudflare" is, how it relates to a message board like "8chan", and most people don't even know what 8chan is, and some people probably know more about 8chan than cloudflare. It would be like Firestone issuing a report saying they are not going to be selling tires to the guy that drove the car to commit the violence, because if they didnt sell him the tires, he wouldnt be able to drive to the mall to commit the violence... when in reality, this is just a marketing message for Firestone about selling tires.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#343

Post by the8472 » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:30 AM UTC

tomatotomato37 wrote: post #306

word-reader wrote: post #199

This post repeatedly refers to 8chan as "lawless" and "unmoderated" but it is neither. As a whole, it is a public website subject to US law, complete with DMCA and search warrant contact forms. The sitewide rule is that all content must comply with US law. The media also keeps saying 8chan, 8chan, 8chan over and over, when it is really just the one most popular board ("pol") that is being discussed. But there are hun…

I think a point of contention over the unmoderated aspect is that compared to it's sister site 4chan which will actively coordinate with authorities and temporarily take the site down whenever evidence is being collected, 8chan appears to treat the authorities with contempt to the point of needing a search warrant. It's creator Fredrick calling for the site's shutdown was the killing strike in my opinion, though the…

Requiring a search warrant seems like due process to me, not contempt. In many other cases handing over data to law enforcement without a warrant is seen as surveillance and a breach of privacy.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#344

Post by philwelch » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:31 AM UTC

sytelus wrote: post #297

word-reader wrote: post #199

This post repeatedly refers to 8chan as "lawless" and "unmoderated" but it is neither. As a whole, it is a public website subject to US law, complete with DMCA and search warrant contact forms. The sitewide rule is that all content must comply with US law. The media also keeps saying 8chan, 8chan, 8chan over and over, when it is really just the one most popular board ("pol") that is being discussed. But there are hun…

Brandenburg v. Ohio is interesting. Technically doesn't it mean that any speech that calls for action against existing law loses protection from First Amendment? I'm sure SC judges will make sane decisions for now but doesn't this door wide open for this possibility? Given most speech needing First Amendment protection is against some law, this SC decision feels very troublesome to me. Especially now that SC judges a…

“Imminent” and “lawless” are the operable terms. I can legally opine to my hearts content about how it could hypothetically be a good idea to rob every bank in New York but if I’m not inciting anyone to actually specifically do so, that’s not legally imminent. Likewise, if I propose a series of constitutional amendments, the net effect is to legalize or legally mandate some sort of atrocity, there’s a case that I’m not even technically advocating for lawless action.

But the primary value of Brandenburg v. Ohio was in rejecting the early 20th century jurisprudence based on the “clear and present danger” status set by Schenck v. United States.

Schenck and the rulings that followed it gave legal cover to imprison people who advocated for draft resistance as well as effectively banning Communist parties (on the theory upheld in Whitney v. California that communism entails the violent overthrow of the US Constitution). Brandenburg and its successor cases effectively overturned that entire line of legal reasoning in favor of an extremely strict standard that only allows the government to prohibit things like inciting mobs or engaging in criminal conspiracies.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#345

Post by jlawson » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:31 AM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #296

airforce1 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> News reports what happened. selectively reports what happened, and only if it tells the right narrative and/or generates clicks, yes. Mass shooting where 3 innocents die = clicks and correct narrative and will therefore be reported. DUI crash where 5 innocents die = boring, wrong narrative; no report Civilian kills police officer = boring, wrong narrative; no report Police officer kills civilian (esp. with differen…

> Civilian kills police officer = boring, wrong narrative; no report You're kidding, right? Cops getting doused in water got national news coverage. So'd https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_killings_of_NYPD_officers

The case you cited isn't just a civilian killing a cop at a traffic stop or during a random crime. It's a targeted assassination of two police officers for politicial reasons. It's more terrorism than crime. This makes it very newsworthy.

Equally, if a cop went out purely to kill some black men for reasons of political revenge, that would be newsworthy in a way that a random death at a traffic stop is not.

The status quo, however, is that random traffic stop deaths of white guys are not newsworthy, but random traffic stop deaths of black guys are national news. That racist double standard is what's being called out.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#346

Post by cfv » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:31 AM UTC

word-reader wrote: post #199

This post repeatedly refers to 8chan as "lawless" and "unmoderated" but it is neither. As a whole, it is a public website subject to US law, complete with DMCA and search warrant contact forms. The sitewide rule is that all content must comply with US law. The media also keeps saying 8chan, 8chan, 8chan over and over, when it is really just the one most popular board ("pol") that is being discussed. But there are hun…

You're complaining about the unfair closing of a bar because drugs were only sold in the toilets area.

That's not how it works anywhere.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#347

Post by smithproxy » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:31 AM UTC

FemmeAndroid wrote: post #49

This is great news. There will be lots of people who are frustrated by this. They may say that Cloudflare shouldn't remove content unless they are legally required. Or that a CDN like Cloudflare is a platform layer, deep in the stack, and that it shouldn't be making decisions based on content. That they are a essentially a utility, and that they should provide the the same service to everyone. But at the end of the d…

> Or if you think Cloudflare's decision was arbitrary and that worries you, you should leave.

I am not entirely sure whether this statement carries moral judgment of those who see it as arbitrary or not. Would you mind clarifying if you intend to pass judgment or not?

Edit: It seems I communicated my point poorly. My last sentence is not intended as a swipe at the parent poster. It's simply a request for clarification. I desired to understand parent's point rather than mischaracterize it.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#348

Post by internet_user » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:31 AM UTC

geofft wrote: post #317

internet_user wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has it occurred to you that radicalization actually happens offline, perhaps even in childhood, due to some kind of real life events, and nothing to do with internet at all? All of this rooted in meatspace. The so called "social defeat". How often do you see successful people that have a fullfilling life go on rampages?

Certainly the radicalization may happen offline. But in the cases at hand, it did not. There is a significant uptick in violence associated with online radicalization, and no corresponding uptick in violence associated with offline radicalization. You can say that the role of the internet is overblown, but the evidence is there. Besides, it's a sort of weird position to take on an a) online forum b) of tech people th…

where is the data? you have something that proves causality of online communication and radicalization?

You make it sound it's almost like terrorism didn't exist before the internet.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#349

Post by tomlockwood » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:32 AM UTC

word-reader wrote: post #199

This post repeatedly refers to 8chan as "lawless" and "unmoderated" but it is neither. As a whole, it is a public website subject to US law, complete with DMCA and search warrant contact forms. The sitewide rule is that all content must comply with US law. The media also keeps saying 8chan, 8chan, 8chan over and over, when it is really just the one most popular board ("pol") that is being discussed. But there are hun…

> This post repeatedly refers to 8chan as "lawless" and "unmoderated" but it is neither.

I'd encourage anyone who thinks it's plausible that /pol/ is "moderated" and "lawful" to go read that board for a few minutes. Perhaps then they can comment here on whether there's a problem with the moderation, or the policing, of the board.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#350

Post by whatshisface » Mon, Aug 05, 2019, 3:32 AM UTC

agildehaus wrote: post #301

airforce1 wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> News reports what happened. selectively reports what happened, and only if it tells the right narrative and/or generates clicks, yes. Mass shooting where 3 innocents die = clicks and correct narrative and will therefore be reported. DUI crash where 5 innocents die = boring, wrong narrative; no report Civilian kills police officer = boring, wrong narrative; no report Police officer kills civilian (esp. with differen…

Maybe you should subscribe to a newspaper or two because otherwise this is what you get -- news that people click on. I wish people would stop blaming the news and blame themselves.

The 19th century version of clicks is "readership," and newspapers pursue it.