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

Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 1001 posts

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#441

Post by wyager »

genon wrote: post #324

Absolutely correct. He is also effectively saying that since he can and will remove sites he personally doesn't like, that he personally approves of every other site using Cloudflare. The excuse he uses for terminating TDS is an absolute crock; if TDS genuinely did falsely and sincerely claim that Cloudflare supports them, then Prince could and should have simply asked them to remove that claim. It's an outrage that…

> It's an outrage that businesses that want to enjoy all the benefits of selling to the public can discriminate against members of that public for any spurious or bigoted reason they like.

I don't think that Cloudflare (or any company) should be legally obligated to work with someone they don't like. (Besides, do you really want your wedding cake baked by someone who hates you?)

However, I think it's a moral and practical travesty that companies have the ability to effectively deplatform people from the modern internet. It's our responsibility as technologists to make sure that you cannot be silenced, whether you're a persecuted minority or someone who would persecute minorities. Having political gatekeepers to the internet is bad for everyone in the long run.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#442

Post by ebola1717 »

ng12 wrote: post #380
bqe wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I get the whole "companies can choose not to host whatever they want" argument, but in order to do anything on the internet, you have to interact with companies. If I switch what you said around a little bit: "I get the whole 'people can choose to interact with whoever they want' argument, but in order to do anything, you have to interact with people." So you're saying I have to interact with Nazis? I have no choic…

> So you're saying I have to interact with Nazis? I have no choice? Hardly. That depends. Who are you? Is there a code of ethics that would compel you to interact with someone? Is it damaging to society if there isn't?

What code of ethics doesn't have an exception for Nazis?

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#443

Post by wcummings »

abiox wrote: post #235
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Am I correct that you are equating a private company terminating its business relationship with an avowed neo-Nazi website with the U.S. military killing civilians?

As far as I can see, you are not correct.

You must need glasses.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#444

Post by jacquesm »

Meekro wrote: post #431
jacquesm wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The concerted effort to equate Neo Nazis to pornographers, atheists and lgbt people is rather worrying as well. If you can't see the difference between those groups then the problem is on your end. Hint: Neo Nazis wish to return to the good old days of 1939 or so where Jews and people of color are either dead, outcast, deported, enslaved or stuck in camps while white men rule the land as is their god given right. So…

I don't think grandparent was equating them, but rather pointing out that someone in a position of power could one day equate them. If the rule is going to be "your website only exists if one of a handful of powerful people don't veto its existence," then you have to worry that one of those powerful people would someday decide that LGBT advocacy turns his stomach in the same way that Daily Stormer pissed off Matthew…

LGBT sites are pretty safe because there are anti discrimination laws that would enable a lawsuit with a high chance of success when discriminated against for that reason. Good luck trying to establish Neo Nazism as a protected class under the law.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#445

Post by wyager »

eyelidlessness wrote: post #416
taneq wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was kind of the point. Non-discrimination, like free speech, is worthless if it only applies to things you approve of.

Nazis are not a protected class.

Free speech, freedom of conscience, and non-discrimination are moral principles that go beyond US federal statute. "US federal law doesn't precisely reflect your moral standpoint" isn't a very good argument against a belief.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#446

Post by matt4077 »

maxlybbert wrote: post #376
xorbyte wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If he doesn't like your site, he may not allow you to use his service, which is something the TOS already cover. Over time, such capricious terminations could lead to the Board seeking action against the CEO, depending on the impact to the business.

I'm no lawyer, but I seem to recall that a contract that allows one side to unilaterally withdraw for unspecified reasons is not a real contract (the legal term is "illusory promise" or "illusory contract"). Cloudflare apparently has a legal team, so I have to assume they know whether their terms of service are actually an enforceable contract, but that provision sounds fishy to me.

> I seem to recall that a contract that allows one side to unilaterally withdraw for unspecified reasons is not a real contract

I certainly hope you're wrong. Because I've "unilaterally withdrawn from" (i. e. "canceled") literally hundreds of contracts, and I don't remember ever giving a reason.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#447

Post by puranjay »

jay-saint wrote: post #192
yahna wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gee, I hope my site doesn't happen to anger him in some way.

There are few things worse than nazis. Just make sure your content is better than fascist propaganda and you should be good.

Well, ISIS has a large internet presence.

To me, actual terrorists actually committing terrorism is far worse than bratty idiots throwing the N-word around on an internet forum

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#448

Post by specialist »

kazagistar wrote: post #65
r721 wrote: post #4

>“This was my decision. This is not Cloudflare’s general policy now, going forward,” Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince told Gizmodo. “I think we have to have a conversation over what part of the infrastructure stack is right to police content.” (from internal email) >Let me be clear: this was an arbitrary decision. It was different than what I’d talked talked with our senior team about yesterday. I woke up this morning i…

So much for believing in "due process".

His only mistake is explaining himself.

If it were my call, every hate group's content would have inexplicable persistent problems. I'd use the Simple Sabotage Field Manual as my playbook.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#449

Post by wyager »

vaishaksuresh wrote: post #437
Spivak wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, the distinction is that neo-Nazi's are bad -- hateful, intolerant, divisive, problematic or however you want to put it. I'm uncomfortable saying that it's okay to do these things to the bad guys, even when it's obvious, because in an alternate universe it might be obvious that gays marrying is hateful toward Christians and intolerant of their sacred rituals.

No. The distinction is that neo-nazis chose to follow a hateful ideology. Gay people did not choose to be gay. I’m not supporting denial of service, in fact I think nobody should be denied service. I’m just pointing out that the equivalence is not right.

So if someone chooses to follow evil red anti-American socialist beliefs, it's presumably OK to censor and deplatform them, right? Normalizing political censorship is how you get McCarthyism and the Red Scare. Normalizing political violence is how you get pogroms. It does not matter who the first victims are; you cannot control how the tides will turn in the future.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#450

Post by dragonwriter »

davidreiss wrote: post #383
jacquesm wrote: post #223

I'm not a fan of cloudflare, I think the net would be better without them. That said I think this was the right call to make. Being the CEO of a company carries with it the weight of having the ultimate responsibility for each and every action of the company and to be an unwilling vehicle for the Neo Nazi movement is something that no company should want to aspire to. Where I have a problem is that ostensibly this di…

> and to be an unwilling vehicle for the Neo Nazi movement is something that no company should want to aspire to. Does that also apply to pornography? What about atheism? What about lgbt content? The concerted effort by the pro-censorship crowd to exploit nazis to promote censorship is rather worrying.

> Does that also apply to pornography?

Private internet services of many kinds prohibiting use for “adult” content much more broadly than pornography is routine, and has been for a long time.

Post reply on HN