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

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#941

Post by umvi »

rsynnott wrote: post #426
Mirioron wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In every other, let's say, G20 country, someone shooting up a shopping mall and killing 20 will absolutely make national news - they will talk about it for months and it will be ranked "top ten worst news for $country in 2019", if not the absolute worst. I don't think this would apply to China and India. Every other country in the world has a lower national population than the US. Yet I doubt that your statement ev…

It looks like there’ve been about four mass shootings in China since 1990; a couple criminal (robbery-related), one terrorist, one random. Of course, information out of China isn’t that reliable, you could argue. The EU as a whole is considerably bigger than the US, and every year or so there’s a mass shooting or other mass killing. And it’s huge news for a long time. The UK has about a fifth as many people as the US…

Well it turns out gun crime under totalitarian regimes is usually pretty low. So it's not very useful to say things like "Look at North Korea! They have way lower gun deaths and mass shootings rates than America!"

If you trade all of your freedoms for securities, you too can have a totalitarian regime that keeps you safe. It's a "slippery" slope that can take centuries, but you just keep losing a few freedoms here, a few there, and pretty soon your monolithic monstrosity of a government holds all the cards.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#942

Post by mikeash »

kelnos wrote: post #551
sytelus wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What happens if all other providers refuse you as well on same basis? What if Comcast refuse you to provide any internet service because they don't like your views on net neutrality?

In my personal opinion, the size of "all others" matters. If you have a monopolistic ISP that refuses to provide service to you because they don't like your content, and they're your only option, then that's a problem. If you have multiple tens of CDN providers and they all don't want to carry your content, then perhaps you should really take a look at your content and have a hard think about why it isn't wanted. And…

Exactly, with similarity being a second important thing. For example, maybe you’re lucky enough to have three ISPs to choose from, but they’re all big American companies with nearly identical corporate cultures, and odds are good that if one of them kicks you off, the others will too.

Hosting a site, on the other hand, has a multitude of very different providers to choose from. Even if you manage to get banned from every hosting provider in the US, ship a server to a colo in Kyrgyzstan or whatever, and keep right on going.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#943

Post by cantcomplain »

yardie wrote: post #648
zimpenfish wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They choose not to apply this approach to white supremacy. "[...] the measures taken against ISIS were so extreme that, if applied to white supremacy, there would certainly be backlash, because algorithms would obviously flag content that has been tweeted by prominent Republicans—or, at the very least, their supporters." https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3xgq5/why-wont-twitter-t...

Honestly, they should have done exactly that. Flag their content and ban them. Then go to the capitol. And when some politician asks, "why was I banned?" Tell them honestly, your statements were determined to be extremist by the same algorithm that bans Al Qaeda and ISIS from posting. Then sit back and watch the real fireworks go off. Just because they have a political title does not mean we have to respect anything…

> Honestly, they should have done exactly that. Flag their content and ban them. Then go to the capitol. And when some politician asks, "why was I banned?" Tell them honestly, your statements were determined to be extremist by the same algorithm that bans Al Qaeda and ISIS from posting. Then sit back and watch the real fireworks go off.

> Just because they have a political title does not mean we have to respect anything that

A big company like Google would want to be on the repubs good side because the Republican party is the ones who support mega corporation like them

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#944

Post by stevenicr »

ryanlol wrote: post #601
stevenicr wrote: post #596

This is one of the most disturbing things I've read this year. Now I definitely do not feel like any of my sites are safe on cloudflare. I would appreciate even more transparency details to be published. When talking about cloudflare following the rule of law - will you all be more specific about which countries and which locales? There are rules in the UK I have read about that people wanted to bust through cloudfla…

>Are you guys also going to pull service for blackhat hacker forums? I've suffered from posts on those as well. They have done this several times in the past, but don’t talk about it publicly. >As soon as stormer was removed you changed from being a dumb pipe infrastructure company into one that can eject and censor at will. So what makes the nazis special to you? Cloudflare had banned many other sites prior to that.

oh, I did not know. It's not the nazis were special, that was the first take down that I was aware of - so to me that take down was the crack in the damn that would make it so all the other groups around the world could now point fingers and say take down 'xyz' and 'abc' because you can do it, that proves that you can.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#945

Post by namtir »

abootstrapper wrote: post #259
cambalache wrote: post #71

Who is going to deplatform Facebook and Twitter? After all plenty of shooters have used them too. Before the usual: " But 8chan is a cesspool of bla bla" Probably it is, but, either the users are doing something ilegal in the site and you close it if the owners refuse to comply with a legal request, or they are not doing anything illegal so they have to be left alone. For the "Free Speech is freedom from government p…

People of color, and LGBT are demographics. White supremacy is an ideology (a reprehensible one at that). People choose their ideology, not their race, or sexuality. They are not the same thing. Third party businesses should not feel any obligation to do business with "dudes who blabber" about the murdering and hate of others.

Yes naturally people of color, and LGBT folk can't ascribe to an ideology. Naah .. that's nonsense. They're immune.

Each group will have its own ideologues, its own agenda.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#946

Post by whenchamenia »

DanBC wrote: post #574
DATACOMMANDER wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speech cannot be violent. To the downvoters: speech cannot be violent, by definition . Using your own private definition of a word—in this case, violence —without making an explicit disclaimer is inherently deceitful.

Buy a dictionary. Volence doesn't have to use physical force.

It explicitly does. But it doesent always even infer harm. I can swing my arms violently, and not hurt anyone.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#947

Post by blackflame7000 »

Lazare wrote: post #82
losvedir wrote: post #72

Does this start to open CloudFlare up to legal issues for all the sites they host? I was under the impression they were more of an infrastructure/utility type service, and weren't liable for what took place, the same way gun manufacturers aren't liable for shootings or gas stations for car crashes. But if now they're manually deciding who goes on their network and who doesn't, it seems like they're more responsible f…

They've kicked people off their service before for content based reasons (eg, Daily Stormer), so this changes nothing. In any case: > I thought there was some sort of legal distinction if they were totally agnostic to what travels over their wires. Is that not the case? Not as far as I'm aware, no. The closest thing I can think of is if they were discriminating based on people's membership in a protected class, eg, i…

> "no female clients" policy

For the record, gender isn't a protected class in a place of public accommodation and it's why clubs in Las Vegas can charge Men more than Women.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#948

Post by whenchamenia »

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.

I am far left and thing free speech is the underpinning of any successful democracy. Your bias betrays you.

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#949

Post by Kalium »

DanBC wrote: post #574
DATACOMMANDER wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speech cannot be violent. To the downvoters: speech cannot be violent, by definition . Using your own private definition of a word—in this case, violence —without making an explicit disclaimer is inherently deceitful.

Buy a dictionary. Volence doesn't have to use physical force.

Having checked one, I found this: "the use of physical force so as to injure, abuse, damage, or destroy"

Would you care to offer a different definition?

Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan

#950

Post by CapricornNoble »

edna314 wrote: post #549
FourScore wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you're willing to give unchecked control of online discourse to a private corporation?

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.

>>>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)?

That's a fairly simple metric. So you're saying we can finally shut down Twitter?

https://youtu.be/n2Gu7NqsCfg

Post reply on HN