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

681–690 of 1001 posts

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#681

Post by austhrow743 »

blacklight86 wrote: post #525

What kind of free speech are we exactly advocating here? 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'r…

>The freedom to spread cheap hate, fake news and bigotry against minorities?

Yes. If the speech isn't terrible it doesn't really need advocating for or protecting does it? Arguing for free speech is inextricably linked to arguing for people to be able to say despicable things.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#682

Post by raxxorrax »

King-Aaron wrote: post #56

A lot of not-so-subtle support for 8chan leaking into this thread. Cloudfare aren't a government. They aren't a democracy. I don't know why some people seem to think they should act any differently. If you own a notice board in the real world, and someone put something horrible on it, you would take it down. This is no different.

The better analogy about notice boards matching the current situation is that third parties offended by the content demand the content to be removed.

I get the mourning about senseless death, but this is basically killing the messenger. And I do indeed believe that people trying to get these platforms shut down don't really care about it too much and have different motives. Maybe just trying to prove a point.

> A lot of not-so-subtle support for 8chan leaking into this thread.

I hope I am not supple about when I say that I think the move is idiotic.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#683

Post by r3bl »

nopcode wrote: post #675
IanCal wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply, or the electricity company refused to provide electricity, or your phone provider cut off service or what not. I think it's key that in this case cloudflare are actively between you and 8chan. The phone provider is the most reasonable comparison, were you able to switch provider. I wouldn't be hugely shocked if…

What’s wrong with hosting a manifesto? Getting insight into the state of mind of such an individual seems valuable, no?

Maybe to you and me, but we're not its target audience. Its target audience is other 8chan users, some of which might be just a step away from committing such atrocities themselves.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#684

Post by Cakez0r »

IntelMiner wrote: post #474
FourScore wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

As opposed to...what, exactly? A government funded Reddit? Which government would fund it? How would it be run?

The government could fund educational programs to teach people to think critically about the content they see on the internet, then they wouldn't have to censor it.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#685

Post by ForHackernews »

austhrow743 wrote: post #681
blacklight86 wrote: post #525

What kind of free speech are we exactly advocating here? 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'r…

>The freedom to spread cheap hate, fake news and bigotry against minorities? Yes. If the speech isn't terrible it doesn't really need advocating for or protecting does it? Arguing for free speech is inextricably linked to arguing for people to be able to say despicable things.

So by this logic, filtering spam is violating freedom of speech?

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#686

Post by artlovecode »

nopcode wrote: post #675
IanCal wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply, or the electricity company refused to provide electricity, or your phone provider cut off service or what not. I think it's key that in this case cloudflare are actively between you and 8chan. The phone provider is the most reasonable comparison, were you able to switch provider. I wouldn't be hugely shocked if…

What’s wrong with hosting a manifesto? Getting insight into the state of mind of such an individual seems valuable, no?

If that's your goal you need to put it in context, like what museums and libraries do. When mixed inbetween memes, there's no context. It's just vitriol being spread

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#687

Post by edanm »

blacklight86 wrote: post #525

What kind of free speech are we exactly advocating here? 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'r…

> The root problem is Americans. And I'm honestly not sure of how to fix the problem with a whole population that has become so irrational, polarized, ignorant and sensitive to hate speech.

That is a baseless and offensive statement. Very unhappily, this kind of irrational hatred (and polarization) is on the rise in many parts of the West. It is not a problem with Americans.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#688

Post by boomlinde »

raxxorrax wrote: post #630
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…

We lived in that world until media pushed mentally ill people to the front. Look at the graphs reporting on racism and the surge of terror. They basically revived nationalistic movements for clicks. Not wanting to reverse cause and effect but there is ample evide ce that the call for censorship massivle accelerated occurrences like shootings.

> Not wanting to reverse cause and effect but there is ample evide ce that the call for censorship massivle accelerated occurrences like shootings.

That is interesting, but just saying that it is so doesn't lend any credibility to the conclusion. If there is ample evidence, surely you should be able to present it?

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#689

Post by sytelus »

arrrg wrote: post #571
sytelus wrote: post #205

This is the same argument cake shops make against taking order from gay people. I do believe that so-called manifesto is mind-numbingly dumb, fact-free and it is dangerous in the sense it will inspire more violence against innocent people. But that precisely what makes it a good test case for asking some fundamental questions. Can commercial businesses with deep reach, pricing power and critical function deny service…

[flagged]

Should cake shop be allowed to not provide service because you believe in abortion rights? Or that you have been in prison? or that you haven't converted to Christianity?

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#690

Post by KaiserPro »

rjf72 wrote: post #633
blacklight86 wrote: post #525

What kind of free speech are we exactly advocating here? 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'r…

Why do you think it might have been that the founding fathers were such advocates for freedom of speech? Do you think they were unaware that it would lead to the normalization of unpleasant things being said? These questions can be answered quite succinctly by asking one other question. In a nation without freedom of speech, who gets to determine what can and cannot be said? The Treason Felony Act 1848 [1] is somethi…

There are a few things that need to be distinguished here.

1) In UK law, there is no right to freedom of speech. The only people who are allowed that privilege are MPs in the house of commons.

2) The communications act expressly disallows "grossly offensive, indecent, obscene or false" However, the definition of what grossly offensive is based on precedent, and is therefore not fixed.

3) libel

Libel needs reform. It needs to be modified sensibly to allow for quick, cheap & legally binding judgements, in the same vein as the small claims court.

The point still remains, even in the USA, there is no such thing as freedom of speech. You are not allowed to say whatever, whenever. The problem comes when trying devise a set of rules that allows a society to operate freely, but not get derailed by ne'er-do-wells

Post reply on HN