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

8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

611–620 of 1001 posts

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#611

Post by anigbrowl »

matt-attack wrote: post #176
CydeWeys wrote: post #76

We wouldn't tolerate the existence of an Islamist site that glorified and helped perpetrate mass incidents of terror against our society. What 8chan is doing is exactly the same, minus the Islamist part, yet there's hypocrisy in how they're treated vs e.g. the social media wing of ISIS. These people are trying to kill as many of us as possible. In no way should society accept it. It's simple societal self-defense. Ro…

> We wouldn't tolerate the existence of an Islamist site Why? Think about what you're saying. Imagine equivalents: 1. We wouldn't allow cell phones that let terrorists communicate 2. We wouldn't allow roads that allow anyone to carry whatever contra-ban they want down them. 3. We wouldn't allow trains that allow just anyone to carry books on whatever topic they want. 4. We can't allow for air that allows two willing…

Well, say you're cruising around the fringes of the web one day and you stumble on a forum where people are plotting to kill you. You, personally. What do you do?

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#612

Post by T4NG »

byuu wrote: post #356
tepidandroid wrote: post #139

My opinion is that freedom of speech is a fine ideal to strive for, but it relies on having a stable society with some minimum level of education (moral and philosophical too, not just the technical kind). It requires people who are able to fully parse the implications of what they are hearing to make sound and rational judgements on the rejection of an idea or the embrace of it. It creates a moral duty for the peopl…

Several of these extremist sites even forbid and censor attempts at calm, level-headed rebuttals to such hatred. They exist solely to propagate bigotry. The dog and pony show from Google and Cloudflare of only stepping in after multiple mass shootings and tons of press coverage tells you all you really need to know about these companies' ethics. They react to sufficiently bad PR, not out of any set of principles, be…

>Several of these extremist sites even forbid and censor attempts at calm, level-headed rebuttals to such hatred

I'm gonna need something citations on being "forbid" or "censor' when posting on these sites. Plenty of people get rebuttaled and turn opinion in threads all the time.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#614

Post by throwaway156503 »

FussyZeus wrote: post #564
psbmt wrote: post #503

>Personally I'm in agreement with Popper's view that societies should tolerate everything except intolerance. That invariably forces the political landscape to move to the left. Which, I guess, is the intended result of holding that point of view.

I'm completely fine with that until we have literally any logical or scientific reasons to oppose tolerance.

This claim to logic or scientific reasoning in the face of not tolerating intolerance seems flawed and, to me, does not serve as a meaningful replacement for the subject of morality:

Imagine you have a child, who is not yours, screaming in your ear at the nearby supermarket. You do not tolerate it. You are intolerant of it.

At face value, with the paradox of tolerance in the form of "society must be intolerant of intolerance," you would need to hold to the position that society should not be tolerant of your intolerance to children screaming in your ear.

You'd need to accept that it's acceptable for children to scream in your ear.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#615

Post by afiori »

microcolonel wrote: post #594
chrisco255 wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the solution then, should be to socialize people in such a way that such views do get challenged. The alternatives, where we have gatekeepers like Google and Facebook entirely deciding what is permissible speech, is too far to the other extreme.

You're assuming these people socialize at all.

they are on a forum, I would say that is a base enough.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#616

Post by DocTomoe »

empath75 wrote: post #485
tepidandroid wrote: post #139

My opinion is that freedom of speech is a fine ideal to strive for, but it relies on having a stable society with some minimum level of education (moral and philosophical too, not just the technical kind). It requires people who are able to fully parse the implications of what they are hearing to make sound and rational judgements on the rejection of an idea or the embrace of it. It creates a moral duty for the peopl…

If 8chan was recruiting people to join al queada in Syria, we wouldn't even be having this conversation. They're a terrorist recruitment site, full stop. Shut them down.

Many future radical islamists get into contact with radical islam through Google. They are a terrorist recuriotment site. Shut them doen.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#617

Post by davrosthedalek »

dcolkitt wrote: post #506
api wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't censorship though. It's private companies refusing to host something. Nobody has been arrested for speech and there are no laws prohibiting speech that isn't overtly and specifically threatening or otherwise violates the "fire in a crowded theater" test.

Imagine an alternate scenario. Say the major tech companies get fed up with Elizabeth Warren's calls to regulate them. Facebook removes all her groups. Cloudflare shuts down her websites. Youtube removes her videos. Google only leaves anti-Elizabeth Warren search results up, etc. Basically a major presidential candidate is completely locked out of having any pretense on the Internet whatsoever. How many people who ho…

I would, as long as the companies fulfill their contracts. And I would also support anybody who in turn would not want to deal with these companies. Which is the check and balances why these companies are not doing that.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#618

Post by jasonlotito »

spaginal wrote: post #179
eridius wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's beyond clear to me that it absolutely had the potential to radicalize shooters and terrorists I mean, it literally radicalized white supremacist terrorists . There's no "had the potential" anymore, it's a fact. It also sounds like it held plenty of child porn, so I don't understand why it took until now for anyone to do anything about the site.

Are you of the belief that hatred and radicalization doesn’t exist in environments that lack free speech? Lot’s of places on this planet have hyper radicalized portions of their populations that commit aggregious acts of violence, and they lack free speech. Yet free speech is being used as the red herring to blame. Unequivocally, your assessment of these forums causing the radicalization is wrong. Plain wrong. These…

> removing and restricting rights for every person DOES NOT STOP THIS BEHAVIOR.

DUI laws don't stop DUI related accidents, but having and enforcing DUI laws decrease DUI related accidents. And while you can't prevent anything 100% of the time, you can actively work toward reducing the chances of something bad happening.

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#619

Post by incongruity »

newhaus1994 wrote: post #491
irrational wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Popper's tolerance criteria, by contrast, seems clearcut What is that criteria? Because I can easily see people disagreeing on what is and is not intolerant. Would you agree that saying that a baker in Colorado must make a cake for a gay wedding is intolerant of the baker's belief? Because I'm certain a sizeable proportion of the US population would agree that it is intolerant.

The criteria is pretty straightforward: you apply the "intolerance of intolerance" to the first intolerant action in the chain, i.e. the one that infringes unprompted on someone else.

Is this confounded or bound up with things like fake news or bad science -- would I, if I owned a platform – call it π-Chan –be prohibited from banning users who espoused anti-vax ideas because I firmly believed they put society at risk (or whatever the justification may be)?

I would, on the one hand, be strongly supported by science, but on the other intolerant of others' who have differing points of view. Would I be allowed to run my platform the way I wanted? Whose rights would prevail in that case?

Re: 8chan goes dark after hardware provider discontinues service

#620

Post by afiori »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #569
tepidandroid wrote: post #139

My opinion is that freedom of speech is a fine ideal to strive for, but it relies on having a stable society with some minimum level of education (moral and philosophical too, not just the technical kind). It requires people who are able to fully parse the implications of what they are hearing to make sound and rational judgements on the rejection of an idea or the embrace of it. It creates a moral duty for the peopl…

Your argument effectively says: 'people are too stupid to be trusted with their freedom'. I get that this is an unpopular opinion, but bad things will happen if people are to be free.

[flagged]
Post reply on HN