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

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#771

Post by scifibestfi »

causality0 wrote: post #649
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…

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. Post the screenshot then. Show us what changed between when CF said "KF is acting within the bounds of the law and will remain online" and today. Refusing service to customers you find contemptible is completely reasonable. Continuing to service customers out of a sense…

In fact freedom of expression is central to protecting the vulnerable. Civil rights were enabled by free speech.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#772

Post by ardel95 »

I wasn’t familiar with Kiwifarms, so I read up about it - and oh, boy. The fact that something like Kiwifarms can exist in the United States without legal or civil liabilities is really problematic.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#773

Post by [deleted] »

pornel wrote: post #655
wikitopian wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of the Daily Stormer, it was free speech and you very clearly and directly made the incorrect call. I'm a big fan of your thoughtful speeches while you grapple with these sticky situations. But why not just invest some pocket change in helping solve TOR's name resolution problem so that removal from the clearnet isn't the death sentence it currently is? There's a simple and obvious solution to this which…

[flagged]

[deleted]

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#774

Post by xdmr »

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…

Did Cloudflare give KF notice that it intended to take this action and enable them to avoid service disruption? Or did Cloudflare intend that KF should experience service disruption?

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#775

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#776

Post by [deleted] »

stepupmakeup wrote: post #509
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…

Forgive me if my understanding is wrong, but if someone were to host a message board or similar site with UGC and have it backed by Cloudflare, and a troll makes posts and threads threatening disasters on multiple occasions even though the site's administration removes them with haste, would Cloudflare also deny service to them? Basically take the current situation but instead of Kiwi Farms, replace it with "Grandma'…

[deleted]

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#778

Post by tomp »

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…

“The law doesn’t work so I’m gonna be the law.”

- every evil person ever

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#779

Post by serpv357 »

mrbt wrote: post #477
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…

It’s nonsense this has anything to do with the law. This solely happened because of mainstream media pressure and significant clients moving or threatening to move away from Cloudflare and the board deciding they don’t need the bad press and loss of customers and nothing else. You provide a service and like every service provider you have a TOS/AUP. The issue is the Acceptable Use Paragraph is clear as long as the co…

>It’s nonsense this has anything to do with the law.

>This solely happened because of mainstream media pressure and significant clients moving or threatening to move away from Cloudflare and the board deciding they don’t need the bad press and loss of customers and nothing else.

Exactly.

I didn't know KiwiFarms existed before it was in the news and trending everywhere, so I don't know a lot about what really went on there in the past years. What concerns me more general with this situation. There is a lot of power in the hands of people able to rile up the mob to de-platform whoever the current very-bad-person of the day is. With the outrage on social media platforms, and then the media pressure from those reporting on the outrage, companies just do the safe, self-interested thing and acquiesce, branding it as some noble act.

It's wrong that whether someone can have a platform, or use a service, or hold a job, is determined not by some kind of objective TOS, but rather whether or not an online mob is demanding their scalp. It's arbitrary, unjust, and has and will harm harmless people.

Re: Blocking Kiwifarms

#780

Post by [deleted] »

pornel wrote: post #655
wikitopian wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of the Daily Stormer, it was free speech and you very clearly and directly made the incorrect call. I'm a big fan of your thoughtful speeches while you grapple with these sticky situations. But why not just invest some pocket change in helping solve TOR's name resolution problem so that removal from the clearnet isn't the death sentence it currently is? There's a simple and obvious solution to this which…

[flagged]

[deleted]
Post reply on HN