Live data from Hacker News

Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

blog.cloudflare.com

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#891
post #573

We take down Al Qaeda terrorist websites all the time because they can be used to radicalize people. Nazis are no different. They are calling for the systematic violent overthrow of the US government and for the extermination of many millions of so called undesirables. This is a terrorist threat. I take this threat very seriously as do many people in the Jewish, Hispanic, and African American community. There are lit…

> The idea that I'm seeing any of these comments arguing to the contrary means HN is already infiltrated by /pol/ and other Nazi sympathizing groups. This is an extremely frightening statement to me. I'm terrified by the fact that you'd paint me as a Nazi sympathizer because my meta-level beliefs that text and speech should be protected are stronger than my object-level beliefs that Nazi philosophy is evil. The Nazis…

> This is an extremely frightening statement to me. I'm terrified by the fact that you'd paint me as a Nazi sympathizer because my meta-level beliefs that text and speech should be protected are stronger than my object-level beliefs that Nazi philosophy is evil.

Well, your theoretical beliefs are now put to a much more practical test, sympathizing with the Nazis in any way shape or form, even if it comes down to just sympathizing with their 'right to a platform' is an excellent way to see how strong ones beliefs really are.

If this is the first time you are in a situation where your strongly held principles are put to the test then I sympathize with you, the longer you live the more this will happen and the more likely you will end up in a situation where there is a conflict between a strongly held belief and a negative consequence for yourself.

Note that bringing weapons (loaded or not) to a march sends a message: we're an army, and we're armed. Not using those weapons should not get them points. One of them brought his car and did use it, the damage was as bad or even worse as if he had fired a rifle.

> The Nazis are not reviled today because they had disgusting beliefs. They're reviled because they actually murdered millions of innocent citizens.

And they would do so again in a heartbeat if they knew they could get away with it.

> I'm okay with neonazis saying disgusting things, as long as they play by the rules and don't commit any violence. (Hell, people brought AK-47's and AR-15's to Charlottesville but didn't use them, despite the violent clashes.) Whatever happened to "sticks and stones"? Do kids not learn that mantra anymore?

Neo Nazis only say disgusting things because they know they are still living in a society where they can not get away with doing more but make no mistake, the overthrowing of that very society is their goal and I'd love to see you arguing for 'free speech' in the society that they wish to create.

You'd be up against the wall faster than you can say 'jack shit'.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#892
post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The idea that I'm seeing any of these comments arguing to the contrary means HN is already infiltrated by /pol/ and other Nazi sympathizing groups. This is an extremely frightening statement to me. I'm terrified by the fact that you'd paint me as a Nazi sympathizer because my meta-level beliefs that text and speech should be protected are stronger than my object-level beliefs that Nazi philosophy is evil. The Nazis…

If you are referring to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never break me", clearly you have other problems with sympathy and empathy. Free speech does not protect dangerous speech.

Perfect example of the snowflake generation.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#893
post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are referring to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never break me", clearly you have other problems with sympathy and empathy. Free speech does not protect dangerous speech.

Yes, it does. Explicitly and confirmed by several Supreme Court cases. Here's a quick and current take on the issue from Eugene Volokh: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

That's talking about hate speech, which is absolutely covered by the first amendment.

Sufficiently dangerous speech is not protected (Schenck v. United States, Dennis v. United States). Whether or not this speech was sufficiently dangerous is a matter of debate, but the comment you're replying to is correct.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#894
post #873

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The idea that I'm seeing any of these comments arguing to the contrary means HN is already infiltrated by /pol/ and other Nazi sympathizing groups. This is an extremely frightening statement to me. I'm terrified by the fact that you'd paint me as a Nazi sympathizer because my meta-level beliefs that text and speech should be protected are stronger than my object-level beliefs that Nazi philosophy is evil. The Nazis…

I'm okay with neonazis saying disgusting things, as long as they play by the rules and don't commit any violence. (Hell, people brought AK-47's and AR-15's to Charlottesville but didn't use them, despite the violent clashes.) So intimidation and threats of violence are ok? Are you really commending these people for their restraint in not using AK-47s at a demonstration? One of the lessons from the first round of Nazi…

Think forward a little bit. The "all talk" guy with vile opinions backed by a violent mob is already in the White House. He won. Now is exactly NOT the time to try to curtail free speech in any way, lest that same precedent be used by the administration to stifle dissent by his opposition - you - in the future.

Freedom of speech (and in fact a lot of the Constitution) is constructed to curtail governmental powers so that dangerous groups in charge aren't able to fundamentally re-shape the country. Why would you want to undermine that when the country is arguably very close to being in that position?

(Personally I think CloudFlare is within its rights to fire a client it doesn't like; non-governmental entities don't have first amendment obligations, just a requirement not to break certain class-based discrimination laws. I don't know if neo-Nazis are a protected class in that respect but it's difficult to see how they would be, since they are not a political party or recognized minority group.)

edit: parentheses

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#895
post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are referring to "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never break me", clearly you have other problems with sympathy and empathy. Free speech does not protect dangerous speech.

Yes, it does. Explicitly and confirmed by several Supreme Court cases. Here's a quick and current take on the issue from Eugene Volokh: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/201...

That's talking about hate speech. Explicitly dangerous speech, or 'fighting words', as acknowledged in the article, are not a protected class of speech under the First Amendment, as established in Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire 1942.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#896

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many European countries (like Germany etc.) have operated with free speech restrictions since the end of WW2 and the slippery slope that is always brought up never materialized. Slippery slope arguments are only valid if you believe that your jurisdiction doesn't have proper rule of law. Otherwise experience, at least in European countries, showed that courts are very well capable of recognizing the importance of fre…

> slippery slope that is always brought up never materialized The targets of the 234,341 criminal insult investigations conducted by German police last year[1] might argue otherwise. A few thousand of those were elementary school kids. Sixteen were preschoolers. > courts are very well capable of recognizing the importance of free speech even for tasteless and hateful speech Bless your heart. I'm going to go out on a…

Investigations are not convictions.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#897
post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't have any sympathy for the Daily Stormer. I just don't see where this is stopping. What else needs to be taken down? /pol/? Who about Breitbart? Or maybe some 2nd WW Nazi propaganda? Or something from the US civil war? You guys seem to be ok with this very slippery slope being assessed by random private companies accountable to who knows. And then you have the nerve to call us who believes that limits of free…

> You guys seem to be ok with this very slippery slope being assessed by random private companies accountable to who knows. To me its strange someone would consider closing down /pol/ a "slippery slope". I am amazed that someone would consider 4chan a moral compass for the type of things their admins should put up with. moot has closed down /pol/ for this very reason in the past with even less "political" awareness t…

>If you can't acquire the resources to start your own print, then tough luck.

"See, we just had a misunderstanding. I thought I lived in the USA, the United States of America, and actually we live in the USA, the United States of Advertising: freedom of expression guaranteed, if you've got the money!"

-Bill Hicks on being censored by CBS

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#898

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You guys seem to be ok with this very slippery slope being assessed by random private companies accountable to who knows. To me its strange someone would consider closing down /pol/ a "slippery slope". I am amazed that someone would consider 4chan a moral compass for the type of things their admins should put up with. moot has closed down /pol/ for this very reason in the past with even less "political" awareness t…

> If you are concerned about being silenced by a corporate vendor, then choose your partners wisely. The issue here is more nuanced. It's about any site on the Internet being censored by a mob. That's why the YouTube or Facebook analogies don't hold. You could always host the content yourself. But DDoS can knock out any unprotected host anywhere. And DDoS protection isn't really something you can DIY. So the issue he…

Ok cool. The question stands. How do you feel about ISIS does? Do you leave terrorist recruitment up or take it down? And if ISIS does have to go, why are white terrorists different?

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#899
post #573

We take down Al Qaeda terrorist websites all the time because they can be used to radicalize people. Nazis are no different. They are calling for the systematic violent overthrow of the US government and for the extermination of many millions of so called undesirables. This is a terrorist threat. I take this threat very seriously as do many people in the Jewish, Hispanic, and African American community. There are lit…

> The idea that I'm seeing any of these comments arguing to the contrary means HN is already infiltrated by /pol/ and other Nazi sympathizing groups. This is an extremely frightening statement to me. I'm terrified by the fact that you'd paint me as a Nazi sympathizer because my meta-level beliefs that text and speech should be protected are stronger than my object-level beliefs that Nazi philosophy is evil. The Nazis…

One of the neo-nazi's ran over a bunch of people with their car in attempt to kill and injure them. Did you miss that video? These nazi's are trying to kill people, they deserve life long prison sentences, not an internet platform to spew hate and calls to violence.

Re: Why We Terminated Daily Stormer

#900

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The idea that I'm seeing any of these comments arguing to the contrary means HN is already infiltrated by /pol/ and other Nazi sympathizing groups. This is an extremely frightening statement to me. I'm terrified by the fact that you'd paint me as a Nazi sympathizer because my meta-level beliefs that text and speech should be protected are stronger than my object-level beliefs that Nazi philosophy is evil. The Nazis…

> I'm okay with neonazis saying disgusting things, as long as they play by the rules and don't commit any violence. So people should be allowed to say anything ? So you can organize any imaginable crime, threaten people and promote false information as long as you don't do any physical harm? I agree that just objecting Cloudflare's decision doesn't make you anything. One being a potential Nazi sympathizer just becaus…

Speech intended to incite violence and threatening isn't protected by the 1st.
Post reply on HN