Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are mixing up 8chan and 4chan.
As somebody who has - embarrassingly - been on 4chan nearly every day since 2004, trust me, the parent post's assertion is a perfectly arguable one.
4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
81–90 of 184 posts
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're either for free speech or you're not, and as much as I would like to have some absolute reference of good and bad, it's all culturally defined. I mean, I think it's horrible, but I can envision lots of functional and useful societies that are horrible based on my principles (how would you like to to be part of a hize mind?), but that doesn't make them bad in an absolute sense. Scaled down, freedom of speech is…
> You're either for free speech or you're not, and > it's all culturally defined. contradict each other completely, right? Everyone is for free speech, it just everyone has a different idea of what that means (as you say)
Depending on how you interpret those terms (that is, if you choose a very specific definition of each), possibly. What I means is that free speech is meant to protect everyone from other people's differing opinions on what is and isn't acceptable in a cultural sense.
If you're "for free speech as long as it's accepted within my culture" then you're not for free speech. I did clarify a bit in my original comment what I was going for though.
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#83I watched this "illegal" video. And not only do I think it should not be illegal, I think watching it should be almost mandatory ! Package it with a safety curriculum, and people should watch it to know what to do. In particular: For the most part, those people in the video who ran, lived, those who tried to drop low, or froze up, died. (There were a couple of exceptions.) Additionally, one guy tried to attack the sh…
[deleted]
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#84I hate 4chan so much, its a diseased cesspool of morons. However, I hate the idea blocking them. Its such a slippery slope from censorship of bad websites to moving to censorship of good websites that the government does not like. Edit: Also, facebook pro-actively took down the video as soon as they became aware.
>Its such a slippery slope from censorship of bad websites to moving to censorship of good websites that the government does not like.
Is it really, though, or do people just like the slippery slope fallacy a bit too much?
Does everyone really think that if a government bans 4chan, no one and nothing is going to stop them from banning everything else because there's precedent now and nothing can be done? That's not how societies or governments tend to work.
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#85I watched this "illegal" video. And not only do I think it should not be illegal, I think watching it should be almost mandatory ! Package it with a safety curriculum, and people should watch it to know what to do. In particular: For the most part, those people in the video who ran, lived, those who tried to drop low, or froze up, died. (There were a couple of exceptions.) Additionally, one guy tried to attack the sh…
The chances of being in such a situation are so incredibly small, that training to deal with it is a wasted effort compared to a host of other stuff — e.g., learning CPR, taking a course in safely driving in wintery conditions, employing elementary fire safety precautions in the house, etc. Even stimulating people to learn to swim if they haven't already saves way more lives! If you normalize an attack like this to t…
[deleted]
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#86I watched this "illegal" video. And not only do I think it should not be illegal, I think watching it should be almost mandatory ! Package it with a safety curriculum, and people should watch it to know what to do. In particular: For the most part, those people in the video who ran, lived, those who tried to drop low, or froze up, died. (There were a couple of exceptions.) Additionally, one guy tried to attack the sh…
Marine friend said if there's a shooter, charge them. Most people aren't trained to handle it. Throw something at them and run at them. If even 5 people had attacked this guy at once, he would have been taken down and many people saved.
This guy maybe was trained... but who knows, 10 people fighting for their lives of their families and kids would be scary to face.
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#87As a bit of an aside, has anyone noticed that 4chan is not using HTTPS lately? I assume it's due to the new ownership. Does anyone have more info?
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#88Scary how an ISP can just up and decide to block a website for hosting what they think is offensive. I guess it's the norm for China and Russia. What's scarier are the people cheering this as if it's a win.
> what they think is offensive.
This is not a a daily instance of "he says", "she says" offensiveness. This is an act of terror, and these platform served as a propaganda media which ought to stopped.
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#89Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't their policy basically "anything goes"? Locking things down seems counter to their goals. I know they have "some" moderation in "some" parts of their site, but moderating too much will just drive people away since many are there for "free speech" reasons. I think they'd be happier with the policy of, "if you don't like it, leave" than trying to appease others.
m00t had taken action when it was necessary in the past. m00t had already banned the offending parties once. Then he reinstated them and gave them a containment board. In retrospect this did not work so well. The containment board became an ever radicalized echo chamber and worst, it did not contain anything. Since Hiro took over it seems like he has ignored the issue. This was pre-neonazi days. /news/ and /pol/ were…
There was never a /news/ "back then", it was created in 2015 and is a text board. There was only /new/ and /new/ and /pol/ never co-existed. /pol/ was created after /new/ was removed because moot was sick of /new/ going constantly off-topic with racism and bigotry. The decision was made to more or less cease moderation of /new/, rename it to /pol/, and use it as a containment board.
Also people need to realize chan culture. Each board may as well be its own website. 4chan hosts /pol/, it also hosts /lgbt/. 4chan's moderation (rather, lack of) is being seen as an issue because of how heavily moderated the internet has become in the past 20 years.
Reddit, the "bastion of free speech", bans every subreddit that gets in the way of advertisement money, giving Voat more popularity. 4chan, "a bastion of free speech", banned #Gamergate discussion which gave 8chan its rise to popularity.
I'd rather have extremists on Reddit and 4chan where they can be debated and talked down to by moderates than on Voat and 8chan where they can form echo chambers. Echo chambers are a lot better at recruitment. Pushing "bad people" away where they are out of sight and out of mind hasn't been solving the problem, it has only been making it worse year over year.
Re: 4chan, 8chan blocked by Australian and NZ ISPs for hosting shooting video
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're either for free speech or you're not, and as much as I would like to have some absolute reference of good and bad, it's all culturally defined. I mean, I think it's horrible, but I can envision lots of functional and useful societies that are horrible based on my principles (how would you like to to be part of a hize mind?), but that doesn't make them bad in an absolute sense. Scaled down, freedom of speech is…
Yeah, free speech doesnt mean "anything goes". We as a society have made the determination that there are categories of speech that are harmful, and as such are illegal. You cant libel, you cant slander, you cant shout "Fire" in a crowded theater. Speech that advocates for the supression or termination of other people based on their race is "Hate speech" and also illegal. There is neither value nor need for complete…
I agree with the content of your message but shouting “fire” in a crowded theater is actually free speech (or at least, only not free speech under an outdated legal standard). It was used as a hypothetical to represent speech creating “clear or present danger” in the Schenk vs. US case and was later overturned in Brandenburg v. Ohio. After that case, speech must be directly inciting certain unlawful or violent action to not be free speech (under the model of creating harm, this isn’t the only model and free speech is essentially case specific, e.g. free speech is different for a government employee vs. a student at a state college vs. an urban professional at a private company). Free speech is honestly pretty sweeping and I always find conversations about free speech on tech platforms really disingenuous because most people usually have no idea what the legal standard is and don’t really separate government and corporate moderation of speech.