Voxility cut off BitMitigate because of 8chan

[Majinhoju]

Again, nobody is obligated to accept or keep 8chan as a customer.  If I provided any hosting service they certainly wouldn't be getting business from me.

[Majinhoju]

2 minutes ago, Aimi said:

Then let me ask, if the government shouldn't be allowed to censor you, why should a corporation?

They can censor all they want.  If the mods here decide that this thread has run it's course they can freely lock and delete any posts they see fit.  It's their platform, not ours.  Same with Facebook, if I post something that doesn't comply with their community standards, they can delete my posts, I don't own Facebook.

[Majinhoju]

And this why people say build your own site, build your own platform etc... If you truly want your speech to be protected then own all the platforms and server space it resides on.  Otherwise stick to talking on the sidewalk, corporations don't own that.

[Aimi]

3 minutes ago, Majinhoju said:

If I provided any hosting service they certainly wouldn't be getting business from me.

Why? What makes their dollar worth less than from a different customer?

[AlexOak]

Just now, Majinhoju said:

And this why people say build your own site, build your own platform etc... If you truly want your speech to be protected then own all the platforms and server space it resides on.

But sir that will cost millions of pesos and permits, regulations, etc.  

[ivan134]

1 minute ago, Aimi said:

Why? What makes their dollar worth less than from a different customer? 

How old are you? Serious question

[spartaman64]

4 minutes ago, Aimi said:

Then let me ask, if the government shouldn't be allowed to censor you, why should a corporation?

and the governemnt can indeed censor you if your speech infringes on the rights of others for example if i say im going to kill a certain someone in a white house some FBI agents are going to come ask me questions and if they deem me a risk then im going to prison

[Suika]

1 hour ago, Aimi said:

Guess what, you don't value free speech. It doesn't matter how much you disagree, you shouldn't celebrate any censorship.

I don't understand this need to link freedom of speech with hateful, inappropriate, and quite literally illegal content. It makes no sense to me to take a concept such as freedom of speech so blatantly out of context all so you have the option (not that anyone with half a mind does) to visit hate filled message boards like 8chan.

 

You know what, if you want to argue for true freedom of speech and no censorship, what do you say to Voxility's freedom to remove any and all association with 8chan? Are they legally bound by the first amendment to continue aiding hosting hateful content? (spoiler: no, they aren't)

[Kisai]

1 hour ago, Waffles13 said:

8chan is/was a site with an extremely small staff of almost exclusively volunteer moderators.

The golden rule about user-generated content, is that you must have 24 hour moderation of ALL content. Volunteer/unpaid is not an excuse. You are not absolved of responsibility for illegal activity by claiming you were not aware of it. The *chan sites know this very well, and their are actually built on this premise. 

 

Any *chan site, I can probably find 100 illegal things within an hour. These sites know what they are doing, and actively encourage illegal activity. The only reason the chan site in question got the axe was because their activities are causing collageral damage in the real world, and that is bad for business. Voxility (which also hosts other *chan sites) and OVH (which hosts well known piracy sites) are the two places that many user generated criminal-level content sites go and then put cloudflare in front knowing that cloudflare does not care that they are protecting criminals.

 

A completely reversal of this attitude needs to happen. Cloudflare, and user generated sites, should not be "responsible" for their user's content, provided that they are actively moderating that content. That means, every piece of content from anonymous/pseudo-anonymous users have to be vetted before being posted. ISP's should not be absolved of responsibility once they are made aware of sites that exist entirely for the purposes of facilitating illegal activity. Yet, sites reported years ago? Still operating.

[Majinhoju]

2 minutes ago, Aimi said:

Why? What makes their dollar worth less than from a different customer?

If all my other customers think better of my business then dropping one customer isn't going to cost me much in the long run.  Companies work very hard to protect their corporate image.  It's why you often hear of someone saying something racist on twitter then getting canned the next day.

[matrix07012]

Just now, Majinhoju said:

And this why people say build your own site, build your own platform etc... If you truly want your speech to be protected then own all the platforms and server space it resides on.

And the building and the ISP...

They're going after Digital Realty who apparently owns the datacenter in which 8chan has their server.

[Aimi]

1 minute ago, ivan134 said:

How old are you? Serious question

Oh you're out of things to say? Better resort to attacking character!

 

1 minute ago, Suika said:

I don't understand this need to link freedom of speech with hateful, inappropriate, and quite literally illegal content.

Once again, illegal content gets removed. What the fuck is the problem with "hateful, inappropriate" speech anyway? It's still  a basic human right to say whatever the fuck you want.

That's how this shit gets linked, no matter what it is, you have a fucking right to say it.

[spartaman64]

2 minutes ago, matrix07012 said:

And the building and the ISP...

They're going after Digital Realty who apparently owns the datacenter in which 8chan has their server.

like i said if you are shouting at me in my house i will tell you to get out and if you say no fair i dont have my own house and everyone else also told me to get out ill say tough shit

[Majinhoju]

6 minutes ago, Aimi said:

Once again, illegal content gets removed. What the fuck is the problem with "hateful, inappropriate" speech anyway? It's still  a basic human right to say whatever the fuck you want.

That's how this shit gets linked, no matter what it is, you have a fucking right to say it.

Again,

When posting online or putting up a website on a hosting service.  You can't assume that what you post is 100% protected.  The mods here can delete this whole thread if they want to, and they likely will lock this.

Unless you own the server space and infrastructure your speech resides on, it can be removed.  What you post online is not the same as talking in your front yard.

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Aimi said:

Once again, illegal content gets removed. What the fuck is the problem with "hateful, inappropriate" speech anyway? It's still  a basic human right to say whatever the fuck you want.

That's how this shit gets linked, no matter what it is, you have a fucking right to say it.

You have the right to say it but not the right of freedom from consequence. Just like you have the right to speech, say to threaten someone, there are consequences from it legal or non legal.

 

Basic humans rights are not so basic in reality, society has decided what these are and have given them meaning in the same way society has deemed certain things not acceptable like threatening someone. You can have all the rights you like but your actions can result in you forgoing those rights.

[Suika]

1 minute ago, Aimi said:

Once again, illegal content gets removed.

Not quickly enough, apparently. Voxility reserves their rights to disassociate with entities that don't clean up their own messes in a timely manner.

2 minutes ago, Aimi said:

What the fuck is the problem with "hateful, inappropriate" speech anyway?

Hateful, inappropriate speech infringes upon the freedoms of other human beings, such as the freedom to continue living, or at the very least, to be treated equal among others.

 

There's a difference between the freedom to speak out against things that go against your own interests, and infringing upon the freedoms of others with hateful speech and actions.

8 minutes ago, Aimi said:

It's still  a basic human right to say whatever the fuck you want.

It is not a basic human right to take freedoms from others, however.

9 minutes ago, Aimi said:

That's how this shit gets linked, no matter what it is, you have a fucking right to say it.

No, it gets linked because people take the concept entirely out of its original context, much like you seem to have done.

[Aimi]

Just now, leadeater said:

You have the right to say it but not the right of freedom from consequence

"You can say things, but if we don't like it we can arrest/deplatform/etc"
Doesn't sound like an actual right to me.

 

2 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Basic humans rights are not so basic in reality, society has decided what these are and have given them meaning in the same way society has deemed certain things not acceptable like threatening someone. You can have all the rights you like but your actions can result in you forgoing those rights.

So if a majority doesn't like it, it should disappear?

Just now, Suika said:

Hateful, inappropriate speech infringes upon the freedoms of other human beings, such as the freedom to continue living, or at the very least, to be treated equal among others.

How the fuck does saying that I hate X person or thing infringe on any fucking rights at all? This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.

Just because I hate you doesn't mean you no longer have the freedom to live. How hard is that for you to grasp?

[spartaman64]

4 minutes ago, Aimi said:

"You can say things, but if we don't like it we can arrest/deplatform/etc"
Doesn't sound like an actual right to me.

 

So if a majority doesn't like it, it should disappear?

How the fuck does saying that I hate X person or thing infringe on any fucking rights at all? This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.

Just because I hate you doesn't mean you no longer have the freedom to live. How hard is that for you to grasp?

as shown by the shooter it appears some people go beyond just saying they hate people and as ive said many times cloudflare and voxility have rights also

[mr moose]

Just now, Aimi said:

"You can say things, but if we don't like it we can arrest/deplatform/etc"
Doesn't sound like an actual right to me.

 

So if a majority doesn't like it, it should disappear?

How the fuck does saying that I hate X person or thing infringe on any fucking rights at all? This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.

Just because I hate you doesn't mean you no longer have the freedom to live. How hard is that for you to grasp?

You seem to lack the understanding between a consequence and a right.  You have the right to say things, you do not have the right to be exempt from the consequences of that.  Also you do not have the right to say a lot of things, you have the right to question government, you do not have the right to call for a riot or defame other people, you do not have the right to harass other people either.  

 

Also you might have the right to say stupid shit, but you do not have the right to force others to provide you the platform. 

 

 

[Majinhoju]

Free speech definition since it seems to need to be said:

 

: the right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations (as the power of the government to avoid a clear and present danger) especially as guaranteed by the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution

 

It doesn't say anything about private companies and their platforms.

 

[Suika]

Just now, Aimi said:

How the fuck does saying that I hate X person or thing infringe on any fucking rights at all? This is the dumbest shit I've ever heard.

Just because I hate you doesn't mean you no longer have the freedom to live. How hard is that for you to grasp?

Ok, let me be extremely specific, as to not be taken out of context: Content that actively promotes white supremacist terrorism is hateful, inappropriate content that infringes upon the freedoms of other human beings.

 

It is no mere coincidence that 8chan gets talked about after these terrorist attacks.

[Aimi]

3 minutes ago, Suika said:

Content that actively promotes white supremacist terrorism is hateful, inappropriate content that infringes upon the freedoms of other human beings.

So if it promotes other terrorism, it's fine? Why specifically point out "muh white supremacist"?

 

4 minutes ago, Majinhoju said:

It doesn't say anything about private companies and their platforms.

If this is what helps you sleep at night after worshiping corporations, then have fun dude.

[Suika]

Just now, Aimi said:

So if it promotes other terrorism, it's fine? Why specifically point out "muh white supremacist"?

Perhaps because that's what 8chan is known for, and what the recent shootings that spurred this entire discussion were about?

[Majinhoju]

1 minute ago, Aimi said:

So if it promotes other terrorism, it's fine? Why specifically point out "muh white supremacist"?

The recent white supremacist mass shootings that occurred lately is likely why they're focusing on it.

1 minute ago, Aimi said:

If this is what helps you sleep at night after worshiping corporations, then have fun dude.

Not sure what you mean by that.  You seem confused on what free speech actually is so I gave you the definition.

[Trik'Stari]

2 hours ago, Aimi said:

What's sort of funny about the whole thing, is that 8chan just hosts user-generated boards. A majority of these boards weren't even focused on "hate", much less politics in general.

Don't really see what this accomplishes, outside of pushing some heavy censorship agenda (which is likely their goal, honestly).

It is entirely the goal of the radical leftists that are controlling hollywood, "news" media, education, and big tech here in the west.

 

"Do you embrace communist revolution? No? Then you're a Nazi and must be killed". That's where this is leading, calling it now.