← Back to context

Comment by HNthrow22

7 years ago

archive.is is a very important tool in online extremism research and you've taken money from far-right extremists, your explanation for why it's inaccessible seems incomplete.

This is probably where I get banned from Hn but it has to be said - to posture as if you care about end users while in the same breath taking money from extremists and turning over personal identifiable information to far-right outlets like DailyStormer, is disingenuous at best and I can think of other ways to describe it which are less charitable.

You also host and protect 8chan.

https://twitter.com/ncweaver/status/1124091916520497153

https://twitter.com/klarajk/status/1122625367490146304

https://twitter.com/Riverseeker/status/1122612031234945024

https://twitter.com/slpng_giants/status/1123592717341200384

https://twitter.com/NathanBLawrence/status/10562868097418199...

https://twitter.com/NJDemocrat/status/897147112273608705

https://twitter.com/InvestMib/status/1123308004873515015

https://twitter.com/jwz/status/1124415034610860033

19 comments

HNthrow22

Reply
syshum  7 years ago

This is amusing, They Banned the DailyStormer which I why I will never support them. While I disagree 100% with the DailyStormer it is not up to cloudflare to decide who can and can not speak, who can and can not access the internet.

The concept of Free Speech is the most important right we have as humanity, while I may not agree with some peoples words I will fight for their right to say those words

And do not even come at me with "well they are private company" we impose all kinds of regulations on private companies when it comes to basic human rights like free speech and Free Association for example private companies can not refuse service based on race, sex, age, etc.

yet you WANT them to censor content, censor speech. You want them to apply your left authoritarian world view to legal speech, and yes everything you have cited is LEGAL SPEECH in the USA.

If there are actual threats, True Threats as defined in US law, then the police should be involved and the people arrested. If there is defamation or other illegal speech then the courts should be involved

It should NOT be the position of private companies to regulate speech online

Platform Access Is A Civil Right. https://humanevents.com/2019/05/03/platform-access-is-a-civi...

  • Aeolun  7 years ago

    Yes, I want them to censor lies and misleading speech. People or services that feed the public dangerous misinformation should be silenced.

    I realize that’s a slippery slope, but I just don’t trust the public to filter for themselves any more.

    • syshum  7 years ago

      So who should be the arbitrator of truth? You do understand that I can cite many many many many many examples though out history where actual truth was suppressed, actual advancement was suppressed by those in power.

      Free Speech is the most powerful tool Minorities and oppressed people through out the world have to end their oppression, and you just want to strip it away because of fear...

      How can you not see how utterly dangerous this idea is, how can you ignore all of human history to believe it is a good idea to suppress speech.

      It is not a slippery slope at all, is termination of basic human rights, is the the return to the dark ages, to Totalitarianism.

      You hope that be installing a regime of censorship and speech control you will end "lies" and/or "hate" when in reality you will ensure its continued existence and growth while taking away peoples power to challenge it in the open light of public debate

      5 replies →

    • tdhoot  7 years ago

      You don't trust the public to filter for themselves but you trust them to elect politicians or judges that will get to filter for you?

      The logical extension of your argument is the public not trustworthy enough to even choose their leaders.

      Free speech isn't a danger to democracy, thinking like this is.

  • fapjacks  7 years ago

    I think you're being downvoted because of the bit about regulation. At least, that is what I choose to believe, because imagine our state of affairs if you are being downvoted because of your comments about the idea of free speech.

    • syshum  7 years ago

      Then you are new to HN...

      Silicon Valley is full of Authoritarians that believe the Tech Companies should be our overlords and be allowed to choose what "truth" is, and who can revel that "truth" to you

      1 reply →

  • thinkingemote  7 years ago

    Eastdakotas replies here and in previous threads indicate that his team have more oversight into his own wants and desires. He also writes more about being consistent in actions than they had when he did this action. I think that's a positive way forward. But the person at the top will be the weakest link. If I was a nation state that's where I would be applying the force not at the company level. Maybe he also realised this?

  • scarface74  7 years ago

    race, sex, age, etc.

    Where does daily stormer fall in the “etc.” part?

    • syshum  7 years ago

      Never said it did, etc was in reference to other protected classes in the list which vary by state.

      Many states, including California, have political ideology has a protected class as well.

      IMO companies run a foul of that when they start banning people for subjective ideology based reasons like "hate speech" which is not illegal in the US, and is every much based in political ideology to make the determination as to what is "hate".

tdhoot  7 years ago

I think the tone of this comment as "courageous" is especially humorous coming from a throwaway account.