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

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#901

Post by foozed »

raxxorrax wrote: post #615
edna314 wrote: post #549

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we really need to talk about closing down a site where people encourage each other to kill other people (no matter who does it)? Why is it so important that there are no exceptions to freedom of speech? Seriously, I just don’t get how the purity of the concept of freedom of speech can be so important that it beats common sense.

Have you an example in history when a lack of censorship posed a problem? I don't, so I value it very much. There were attrocities in my countries in the name of common sense on the other hand. Even if intuitive, censorship isn't an answer to anything.

This historical comparison just isn't fair since at no point in human history the possibilities of communication were anywhere close to what they are now.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#902

Post by erichurkman »

ViViDboarder wrote: post #341
tenpies wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I actually ended up having these on reddit I am actually quite surprised how complicit the media is in not reporting what goes on Reddit. It's the one place on the "mainstream" internet I run into where you can see calls for political assassinations in default subs, sub-reddits devoted to theft, ethno-nationalism, terrorism, and all sorts of content that makes 4chan seem tame in comparison. Then there is the huge c…

If reported, Reddit (the company) will usually moderate or shut down subs like those. Recent example being what they just did with /r/T_D.

It took them _years_ to touch r/t_d despite many reports to the admins about abusive behavior running rampant. In true Reddit form, they only did something after the mainstream forced them to react. (Same problem they had with other questionable groups, like r/shoplifting, got banned after media attention.)

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#903

Post by Jwarder »

ignoramous wrote: post #442
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…

Cloudflare is committing itself to do as they are told by the governments, in the spirit of upholding the law [0] on govts' behalf (despite under no obligation to do so), if they deem fit. Whether this makes them reasonable, time will tell. Full marks to Cloudflare for so eloquently addressing this and covering themselves with as much grace as they could muster. If one reads between the lines, censorship is coming. T…

> still is a crime to be a minority in some countries.

Do you have examples in mind?

I have no doubt that this is the case, but I can't think of any examples.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#904

Post by burnte »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #837
bart_spoon wrote: post #814

I'm not sure I understand what those here rallying in defense of "free speech" are arguing. Free speech has not been violated. The government did not mandate this. As an individual citizen, I am allowed to say whatever I want under the protection of free speech. But I am not entitled to others providing me a platform for my speech. Other people/companies can't be coerced to provide me such a platform. And even if eve…

As has been explained in this thread multiple times now, Free Speech is a principle, not a law. If, for example, someone in North Korea spoke against their government and was executed for it, that'd be a violation of Free Speech. Arguing "but North Korea doesn't have a law protecting people who speak against the government" would be ridiculous. Similarly, if a person or organization in the United States is silenced b…

"Free Speech has absolutely been impinged by this decision."

No, it hasn't. No one has a moral, legal, or ethical responsibility to pay for someone else's speech. The government must tread lightly, but private individuals are under no compulsion to listen to others. 8chan is NOT having their speech rights infringed, they are simply having a business agreement terminated. They are still 100% free to create a website somewhere else, write a book, or protest in the streets.

Do not confuse private property (Cloudflare's servers) with the public square.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#905

Post by elbrian »

cryptonector wrote: post #856
latexr wrote: post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one talks about de-platforming CNN. Roger Ebert[1], Tristan Harris[2], and others argue that the way CNN (and others) covers these events incentivises further occurrences. [1]: https://boingboing.net/2012/12/15/roger-ebert-on-how-the-pre... [2]: I’m having trouble finding the video amongst the flood of news reports from the recent events.

But do they propose that CNN be deplatformed?

The definition of the word `deplatform` is:

> To prevent someone from utilizing a platform to express their opinion.

CloudFlare is not a platform for expressing opinions. As such, 8chan was not deplatformed... so what point are you really trying to make, here?

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#906

Post by judge2020 »

eteos wrote: post #842

Right, suddenly CF cares about 'law'. Scam (lots of phishing and fake webshops), spam, piracy, illegal pornography, it's all chilling on CF's network en masse. When they get notified about this, do you think they terminate that client? No, they will just come up with some dogmatic story [1] and ignore every call to action/cooperation. "we are rebuilding the Internet, and we don't believe that we or anyone else should…

You're missing the point brought up in both blog posts: If CF removes these sites, they literally won't go offline. They'll just stop using CF. The content is still there.

CF forwards DMCA complaints to the website host so they can deal with the illegal content. CF already uses Safe browsing (or perhaps another system) to flag domains[0] that might be phishing/malware related. Illegal porn is something the sites themselves have to remove since (as said above) removing the site from CF only saves face for CF and doesn't change the content being on the service[1].

0: https://community.cloudflare.com/t/your-domain-has-been-susp...

1: to add, CF doesn't allow video files to be directly proxied on their network (when the main point of your site/service is serving these video files), you either need to use CF stream or have your video files on a separate non-proxied subdomain. If something illegal is stored on CF stream or Workers KV, they can take it down via the abuse form since they're the host of that content.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#907

Post by themagician »

Ajedi32 wrote: post #885
Traster wrote: post #864

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very strange idea of what Free Speech is. The reason Free Speech is related to government is that government has a monopoly on violence. Government can turn up with guns at your house and stop you speaking in a way that no other body can. What is happening here is very different. Cloudflare isn't preventing anyone from saying anything. All that is happening is Cloudflare is using it's freedom of association…

Cloudflare may not be a monopoly, but they don't necessarily need to be a monopoly to be able to effectively police speech. A duopoly or oligopoly can be just as effective at that task, provided all competitors have similar rules about what sort of speech they disallow. Now maybe we're not quite at that point yet (after all, the Daily Stormer did eventually find a CDN that would take them), but we may very well be ge…

Free Speech doesn’t require a CDN. Lol. It’s not like the First Amendment comes with a 99.999% uptime guarantee.

Some of you are so dense. Free speech is about not being dragged off in the middle of the night and sent to a gulag.

There’s no fine line here, no slippery slope. Everyone on 8chan is free to continue publishing whatever they want. It just won’t be published over a high availability CDN. It also won’t show up in Times Square.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#908

Post by bsagdiyev »

x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #898
Ajedi32 wrote: post #837

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As has been explained in this thread multiple times now, Free Speech is a principle, not a law. If, for example, someone in North Korea spoke against their government and was executed for it, that'd be a violation of Free Speech. Arguing "but North Korea doesn't have a law protecting people who speak against the government" would be ridiculous. Similarly, if a person or organization in the United States is silenced b…

I'm always amazed at how right wingers are all "property rights, property rights". And when something like this happens, they quickly switch from demanding that the property rights of CloudFlare be observed, to "free speech, free speech" concerning the conservatives on 8chan.

That's a large brush you're using to paint a group of individuals. I think I would be considered conservative by a lot of the more liberal types here but think that CloudFlare is within their rights to do what they want.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#909

Post by agensaequivocum »

sv123 wrote: post #899
agensaequivocum wrote: post #895

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Similarly, I cannot be forced at gunpoint by the government to provide a cake for a gay wedding if I have a moral objection.

Discriminatory business practices should not be conflated with free speech.

What I produce in my business is an expression of myself that I may or may not exchange with another. I have the right to or not to associate with whomever I choose to.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#910

Post by lightbyte »

kaolti wrote: post #792

Quick question for everyone who's on board with this. Do we actually KNOW that banning "hate speech" results in less hateful actions in the short and long term as well? I'll wait.

Actually yes, it has been shown effective:

http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/cscw18-chand-hate.pdf

>We find that the ban worked for Reddit. More accounts than expected discontinued using the site; those that stayed drastically decreased their hate speech usage—by at least 80%. Though many subreddits saw an influx of r/fatpeoplehate andr/CoonTown “migrants,” those subreddits saw no significant changes in hate speech usage. In other words,other subreddits did not inherit the problem. We conclude by reflecting on the apparent success of the ban,discussing implications for online moderation, Reddit and internet communities more broadly

Post reply on HN