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

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#611

Post by stordoff »

mschuster91 wrote: post #599
stevenicr wrote: post #596

This is one of the most disturbing things I've read this year. Now I definitely do not feel like any of my sites are safe on cloudflare. I would appreciate even more transparency details to be published. When talking about cloudflare following the rule of law - will you all be more specific about which countries and which locales? There are rules in the UK I have read about that people wanted to bust through cloudfla…

> As soon as stormer was removed you changed from being a dumb pipe infrastructure company into one that can eject and censor at will. You're defending the Daily Stormer, do I read that correctly? > I look forward to an updating listing of sites that are not reachable via the cloudflare internet in various places. Cloudflare is not "the Internet". If Stormer or 8chan get kicked off of them, you can still access them…

> You're defending the Daily Stormer, do I read that correctly?

I don't think that's a fair reading of it - he's attacking CloudFlare's decision to remove it, not defending the Daily Stormer per se (in a "I will defend to the death your right to say it" sort of way was my reading of it).

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#612

Post by afthonos »

ptah wrote: post #579
Lazare wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The freedom to spread cheap hate, fake news and bigotry against minorities? I'm sorry but moderating such offenses isn't a limitation to free speech. For the same reason why, if you start shouting nig or monkey to black people in a shopping mall, the police is likely to intervene and take you away - and I don't think that any sane person would argue that they're violating your freedom of speech. Popper taught us th…

yes, i think this is a serious flaw in the US constitution. other countries are more sensible and reasonable when it comes to dealing with hate speech

Consider that every limitation to the first amendment ever allowed by SCOTUS was the government limiting the speech of a minority, and never the speech of a popular majority to protect a vulnerable minority, and then what you advocate for becomes empowering powerful people to silence the powerless.

I don’t consider being against that a flaw.

Reference: https://abovethelaw.com/2019/08/should-the-north-carolina-gu...

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#613

Post by dangxiaopin »

AlphaGeekZulu wrote: post #597
rlonn wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but how can anyone say "what kind" of free speech...? Don't you see that labeling or discriminating between "free speech of type A, allowed" and "free speech of type B, disallowed" defeats the whole notion of "free"? Somehow people tend to think that their own discrimination isn't, while others is.

There is a clear (and working) distinction between free speech of type A and of type B in other countries. In Germany, just as an example, you are free to express your OPINION (type A), but not to express false facts (type B). If you express false facts, knowingly, and those false facts have damaging effects you are fully liable for compensation. Simple example: if a person wrongly claims, that some local artisan's b…

This reminds me of an actual Soviet joke:

"Pres. Reagan: Mr. Brezhnev, in the USA we have free speech- anybody can say in public: President Reagan is a fool!"

"Secretary Brezhnev: Pres. Reagan, in the USSR, we also have free speech- anybody can say in public: President Reagan is a fool!"

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#614

Post by theshadowknows »

Sorry but a company saying they won’t put up with your bullshit is not in any way censorship. If a company hates puppies and they stop hosting sites with puppies that’s also not censorship. Go learn how to build your own service and put your bullshit there. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. 8chan exorcised their freedom of speech, and now there are albeit small consequences. That’s how the system is supposed to work.

People inevitably trot out counter examples that they believe will “own” my “libtard” views like the whole bakery thing. Should the bakery have had to make the cake for the gay customers? Nope. Their a business and can refuse service for whatever reason. Turns out there were some legal things involved. Guess what. Consequences.

We have a tenuous and often brittle social contract. The social contract decides what is and what isn’t ok. And once you break the contract there are often consequences. That’s not censorship. That’s existing in a society. Companies and people that don’t like those consequences are free to exit this society and begin their own at any time. But guess what. There’s consequences to that, too. The only real question is if they can be adults about it and accept those consequences. And in most cases they can’t.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#615

Post by raxxorrax »

edna314 wrote: post #549
FourScore wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're willing to give unchecked control of online discourse to a private corporation?

Do we really need to talk about closing down a site where people encourage each other to kill other people (no matter who does it)? Why is it so important that there are no exceptions to freedom of speech? Seriously, I just don’t get how the purity of the concept of freedom of speech can be so important that it beats common sense.

Have you an example in history when a lack of censorship posed a problem?

I don't, so I value it very much. There were attrocities in my countries in the name of common sense on the other hand.

Even if intuitive, censorship isn't an answer to anything.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#616

Post by wastedhours »

tyre wrote: post #132
Lazare wrote: post #15

On the one hand, I like the idea of a free, open, and distributed internet, where no one company or government has the power to control what is distributed or discussed. As the great John Gilmore said, more aspirationally than accurately even then: "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." On the other hand, we don't live in that world, and I don't know how well it would work in practice if we d…

This feels like a misunderstanding of the word freedom. Freedom in speech means that I can say what I want. It does _not_ mean that a hosting company has to host it or that a CDN has to optimize it or that a search company has to rank it or that an ad-network has to monetize it. Each of those players is free to do what they think is best with their time, resources, etc.; which often includes thinking of what "the pub…

Beautifully summed up by this XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1357/

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#617

Post by dangxiaopin »

yhamv wrote: post #609
cryptonector wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps only if commenters glorified it? I'm sure you can find people to do that on FB or anywhere else, and it may take time to moderate such commentary. But no one would deplatform FB or Twitter -- they're too big. This approach means we have a powerful dynamic in place to limit the reach of any social media that isn't already "too big to deplatform".

In fact Facebook said they didn't remove the nz shooter livestream because nobody bothered to report it until very late

I would argue that the actual graphic livestream of a real mass murder is a much much more toxic and dangerous material than any theoretical manifesto. It's not even in the same league. But Facebook is too big to be dropped as a customer!

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#618

Post by dredmorbius »

FourScore wrote: post #444
Lazare wrote: post #15

On the one hand, I like the idea of a free, open, and distributed internet, where no one company or government has the power to control what is distributed or discussed. As the great John Gilmore said, more aspirationally than accurately even then: "The Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." On the other hand, we don't live in that world, and I don't know how well it would work in practice if we d…

So you're willing to give unchecked control of online discourse to a private corporation?

The power is not unchecked.

It can be checked through lawsuit -- 8chan could conceivably sue Cloudflare under numerous doctrines, starting with breach of promise / breach of contract.

Another service provider could step up, as was the case with Daily Stormer, and is extensively commented upon in Prince's commentary, and provide services.

Regulatory or legal procedures could be established to specifically address this situation or provide redress.

Public outcry, market sanctions, or labour actions might be taken against providers who exercise such power in manners which are seen as morally reprehensible. For similar examples, see Google employees over Dragonfly or Edleman's emplyee backlash over a contract with a border-wall services company.

The question to be asked, the question we all have to ask, is whether or not individuals, groups, companies, or inchoate movements which are themselves dedicated to abolition or denial of civil order and rule of law are themselves deserving of its full protections in pursuing those ends. And a considerable case can be made for "no".

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#619

Post by keymone »

jquery wrote: post #410
xxxpupugo wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I learned by watching US culture warfare in recent years, is any value have a limit to it. If it has been codified or been treated as absolute and untouchable, then it becomes its own weakness. So does free speech. Certain speech that are known to cause violent result/response from its audience should be dealt with carefully. In which case, if 8chan has popularized itself as the platform to announce when an…

>Certain speech that are known to cause violent result/response from its audience should be dealt with carefully. Which speech is that, exactly? Do you have a list of all the problem topics we need to ban?

- inciting violence and/or hatred

feel free to add more

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#620

Post by rishav_sharan »

ptah wrote: post #579
Lazare wrote: post #560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The freedom to spread cheap hate, fake news and bigotry against minorities? I'm sorry but moderating such offenses isn't a limitation to free speech. For the same reason why, if you start shouting nig or monkey to black people in a shopping mall, the police is likely to intervene and take you away - and I don't think that any sane person would argue that they're violating your freedom of speech. Popper taught us th…

yes, i think this is a serious flaw in the US constitution. other countries are more sensible and reasonable when it comes to dealing with hate speech

Strange. As someone from a developing nation, this is one aspect of US which I respect the most. The ability to say your mind without repercussions even if it is not politically correct.

In India, the governments are known to use sedition and other laws pretty liberally to silence free speech.

I'd rather that this "serious flaw" remain, than the US too become the same as any other nation, where posting a joke on the PM can lead to jailtime.

Post reply on HN