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

Blocking Kiwifarms

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

691–700 of 1001 posts

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#691

Post by ryukoposting »

dillondoyle wrote: post #599
AussieWog93 wrote: post #486

I think a lot of people in the comments don't understand what Kiwifarms is. I say this as someone who occasionally browses there and gets some (admittedly sick) enjoyment from it: the main draw of the website is a place for people to get together and bully mentally ill "weirdos". It's not just about people posting offensive shit in their own little corner of the internet - what happens there spreads out, by design, i…

What specifically makes their victims 'weirdos' and why do you feel the need to comment that you get off to 'watching people do fucked up shit for internet clout' That's exactly what you are doing right now. They target trans women like Lizzy Waite and Clara Sorrenti. And gay children ... What is so weird about kids who need support from the Trevor Project hotline? Being queer is not a mental illness.

As someone who got exposed to 4chan far too early in life, I think I can answer the first bit. Ever heard of Hoarders? My 600lb Life? It's the same reason people watch that garbage.

Being gay isn't a mental illness, and it isn't the same thing as reality TV. The LGBT community is, at present, an easy target. There are also a large number of LGBT people who struggle with mental illness (shocking in a society where KiwiFarms exists, I know), and mentally ill people are also easy targets.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#692

Post by Vecr »

hammyhavoc wrote: post #256
rejectfinite wrote: post #237

Cloudflare is a private busniess and can refute service ofc, but should the owner not get some notice of the termination to move to another service in time?

You mean coverage in mainstream media outlets and the angry mob wasn't enough of a canary in the coalmine for their non-biz? Literally, they just point their domain at new DNS. It takes seconds. Who is going to want to do biz with KF?

Actually I think Cloudflare holds the DNS names for the .net name, as well as possibly others. The reason I think this is because they are DNSSEC validated, and the .ru name does not have DNSSEC.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#693

Post by dmw_ng »

schleck8 wrote: post #675
derac wrote: post #654

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't trust any screenshot coming out of Kiwifarms since I've seen an edited screenshot tweeted with 10 thousand likes from a (now suspended) popular KF user. You could only see it if you know what to look out for, there was a masking error on the overlayed image in one corner. And the tweet's text was most likely edited with dev tools.

I only briefly flicked through screenshots, but seems parent comment has some truth to it:

https://archive.ph/E2pxQ

https://archive.ph/1cA1M

https://archive.ph/g585F

Maybe it's possible to game archive.ph, but seems more likely this person's humor has a consistent strongly misogynistic theme. Very happy to see a site causing actual suicides taken down, but the champion of the campaign doesn't come across as any kind of hero

It's also interesting to juxtapose comments here against the fact it was so easy to find the original thread on Google.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#694

Post by [deleted] »

notatoad wrote: post #451
eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…

>rather than free speech i encourage anybody who is calls themselves a "free speech advocate" to consider what kiwifarms has been doing to "free speech". their intimidation campaigns have been doing a lot more to harm the cause of free speech than this decision by cloudflare is. if you really believe in free speech, you understand that trans people deserve free speech too, and kiwifarms harrasment campaigns have been…

[deleted]

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#695

Post by ThrowawayTestr »

schleck8 wrote: post #675
derac wrote: post #654

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't trust any screenshot coming out of Kiwifarms since I've seen an edited screenshot tweeted with 10 thousand likes from a (now suspended) popular KF user. You could only see it if you know what to look out for, there was a masking error on the overlayed image in one corner. And the tweet's text was most likely edited with dev tools.

No post body was provided.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#696

Post by pixl97 »

BrainVirus wrote: post #589
notatoad wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>rather than free speech i encourage anybody who is calls themselves a "free speech advocate" to consider what kiwifarms has been doing to "free speech". their intimidation campaigns have been doing a lot more to harm the cause of free speech than this decision by cloudflare is. if you really believe in free speech, you understand that trans people deserve free speech too, and kiwifarms harrasment campaigns have been…

Why should I take this argument on good faith when literally this same argument has been repeatedly used in attempts to deplatform comedians, popular politicians, writers, journalists and tons of ordinary people?

Were said comedians, popular politicians, writers, and journalist calling for immediate violent acts and intimidation of others.

If yes, then I believe they should be censored.

If no, , then they should not.

Authoritarians will use both arguments at the same time, they have no problem with hypocrisy. They will threaten you with violence, and demand their violence be published, while with the slights of those they do not like demand censorship.

Calls for violence must not be tolerated, for if they are civil society cannot exist.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#698

Post by wbl »

eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…

Actually it's about the fact that you don't want to spend the money to enforce an AUP, like just about every other ISP does. Instead you want someone else to make the that system for you. Every printer gets to decide if they want to print Mein Kampf, and most decide that they won't. Movie theaters get to decide if they want to show dirty movies. Liberal society recognizes human interactions beyond the merely legal.

What you're saying is you're fine hosting harassment until it gets bad enough for a court to finally intervene and order it offline. But Kiwifarms was already banned in New Zealand for hosting a snuff film showing innocent people getting slaughtered for their religion. I'm not sure what exactly you wanted: a US court issuing an order that would almost certainly be unconsitutional prior restraint? An obscenity prosecution?

Society has decided that it's your choice what kinds of speech the company you control enables, and you've decide to tell us that you're going to pretend it isn't. Well, it is. Those sites are up on Cloudflare, because you want them to be, and nothing you say is going to change that reality.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#699

Post by tsujamin »

eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…

> That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be the ones making that call, and no one else who should was stepping up in spite of being aware of the threat.

sure, but I presume CF makes the decision of whether or not to facilitate access to/sell services to other undesirable bits of the internet all the time without requiring law enforcement intervention.

  * Does CF wait for LE or a court case to block or drop malware distribution or command&control channels from their cache/NS/1.1.1.{2+} resolvers?
  * Would CF wait until LE intervenes to drop a known, demonstrated CP host? 
  * Would CF continue to cache pirated material until a court stepped in even if approached by an alleged copyright holder? 
  * Would any of the above actors have a right of appeal with CF?

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#700

Post by [deleted] »

notatoad wrote: post #451
eastdakota wrote: post #391

Reading over the comments I see everyone thinking this is about “free speech.” It is not. It’s about what in the US you’d call “due process” and in all the rest of the world you’d call “rule of law.” Our decision today was that the risk created by the content could not be dealt with in a timely enough matter by the traditional rule of law systems. That’s a failure of the rule of law on two dimensions: we shouldn’t be…

>rather than free speech i encourage anybody who is calls themselves a "free speech advocate" to consider what kiwifarms has been doing to "free speech". their intimidation campaigns have been doing a lot more to harm the cause of free speech than this decision by cloudflare is. if you really believe in free speech, you understand that trans people deserve free speech too, and kiwifarms harrasment campaigns have been…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN