7 ms·

Is there anything preventing these fucking nazis from becoming a domain registrar? Or finding a company with no morals willing to host their domain? I don't see

by mnm1 9y ago

Is there anything preventing these fucking nazis from becoming a domain registrar? Or finding a company with no morals willing to host their domain? I don't see why they can't do one of the above. There's no duty on the part of Godaddy, Google, or any other company to provide these fuckers with service. Let them figure it out themselves if they want to stay online. This isn't a free speech issue. They have the right to say whatever they want. They do not have a right to force others to help them say whatever they want.

dogma1138 9y ago
Would you say the same thing if this was an LGBT group?
- balls187 9y ago
  This is a false equivalence. LGBT groups aren't known for committing crimes against humanity.
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    No this isn't false equivalence, either all speech is free or no speech is free. Where speech threatens one of your other freedoms then it should be judged on a case by case basis. This also brings net neutrality into play, DNS is a core internet service, without it the internet cannot function. We have now 2 internet service providers effectively refusing to provide services to some one based on political and subjective perception of the content rather than an objective one based in law. This isn't even Google or GoDaddy giving a fuck about human rights, there are plenty of hate groups on Google Groups and plenty of subhuman content hosted directly on GoDaddy. Do you think GoDaddy didn't knew what they were providing DNS services too? they do KYC both individually and collectively any internet service provider these days gets a threat report based on it's customers because of the threat of hacktivism. Nazi's didn't rise in germany because they were allowed a platform to speak from, they've risen because they've silenced anyone who opposed them. Silencing the opposition should never be acceptable to anyone that holds even a shred of liberal values.
    - matt4077 9y ago
      > either all speech is free or no speech is free. That simply not true, it's the slippery-slope fallacy. Observe: "When you let them take away any weapons, they'll take away all the weapons. Therefore, it should be my right to own nuclear weapons". > We have now 2 internet service providers .... Domain registrars are not ISPs in any sense of the word, least of all the net neutrality sense of the word. > Nazi's didn't rise in germany because they were allowed a platform to speak from, they've risen because they've silenced anyone who opposed them. The two parts of that sentence directly contradict each other. The second part is (Not allowed free speech -> Inability to gain power).
      - dogma1138 9y ago
        Actually they are ISPs, Net Neutrality goes way beyond if your ISP can throttle traffic based on content, that is the least important argument. It's about the not having any discrimination based on the nature of content across the internet period. And no it's not a slippery slope, freedom of speech is paramount, all speech should be free period, regardless of what stupidity comes out of someone's mouth. You can be a holocaust denier racist spewing racist slur at orphans and as european jew whose parents were born in 1942 and then had to live behind the iron curtain will fight your right to say anything you want even if you would say that to me i might punch you in the face afterwards.
      - yahna 9y ago
        > That simply not true, it's the slippery-slope fallacy. Observe: "When you let them take away any weapons, they'll take away all the weapons. Therefore, it should be my right to own nuclear weapons". It's not a slippery slope fallacy. It's the typical American view on free speech. VS say Canada where Nazi's aren't protected in spreading their hate.
    - oliwarner 9y ago
      Oh yeah! Let's hyper-simplify the socio-economic reasons Nazism got a footing into post-WW1 Germany. That'll help. You're trying to apply free speech to dealings with a private company. They're not a government though. You get your service from Google, et al, at their pleasure. If you break their terms, they're well within their rights to show you the door. Don't like their terms, use another company or DIY. We can chase the discrimination and protected-class-advantage rabbit down its hole, but really, this comes down to what Google (et al) considers criminal incitement to violence, which is a proven [1] exception to first amendment rights. Google doesn't have to prove things that far, but denying these violent racists their business is a good way to avoid becoming complicit. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action
- willstrafach 9y ago
  Probably a bad example there. If I recall correctly, sexual orientation is considered a protected class.
  - rbanffy 9y ago
    And, as far as I know, the LGBT crowd never built gas chambers and ovens to more efficiently mass murder other groups. Nazis did.
    - dogma1138 9y ago
      It doesn't matter, free speech is free speech.
badwulf 9y ago
I hate nazis and fascists and any group that uses violence(and yeah that includes antifa and anarchists). I'm still not fine with private companies being judge jury and executioner. If they realise they can freely go after people, they might start doing it to further their advantage.

by mnm1 9y ago

dogma1138 9y ago

Would you say the same thing if this was an LGBT group?

balls187 9y ago
This is a false equivalence. LGBT groups aren't known for committing crimes against humanity.
- dogma1138 9y ago
  No this isn't false equivalence, either all speech is free or no speech is free. Where speech threatens one of your other freedoms then it should be judged on a case by case basis. This also brings net neutrality into play, DNS is a core internet service, without it the internet cannot function. We have now 2 internet service providers effectively refusing to provide services to some one based on political and subjective perception of the content rather than an objective one based in law. This isn't even Google or GoDaddy giving a fuck about human rights, there are plenty of hate groups on Google Groups and plenty of subhuman content hosted directly on GoDaddy. Do you think GoDaddy didn't knew what they were providing DNS services too? they do KYC both individually and collectively any internet service provider these days gets a threat report based on it's customers because of the threat of hacktivism. Nazi's didn't rise in germany because they were allowed a platform to speak from, they've risen because they've silenced anyone who opposed them. Silencing the opposition should never be acceptable to anyone that holds even a shred of liberal values.
  - matt4077 9y ago
    > either all speech is free or no speech is free. That simply not true, it's the slippery-slope fallacy. Observe: "When you let them take away any weapons, they'll take away all the weapons. Therefore, it should be my right to own nuclear weapons". > We have now 2 internet service providers .... Domain registrars are not ISPs in any sense of the word, least of all the net neutrality sense of the word. > Nazi's didn't rise in germany because they were allowed a platform to speak from, they've risen because they've silenced anyone who opposed them. The two parts of that sentence directly contradict each other. The second part is (Not allowed free speech -> Inability to gain power).
    - dogma1138 9y ago
      Actually they are ISPs, Net Neutrality goes way beyond if your ISP can throttle traffic based on content, that is the least important argument. It's about the not having any discrimination based on the nature of content across the internet period. And no it's not a slippery slope, freedom of speech is paramount, all speech should be free period, regardless of what stupidity comes out of someone's mouth. You can be a holocaust denier racist spewing racist slur at orphans and as european jew whose parents were born in 1942 and then had to live behind the iron curtain will fight your right to say anything you want even if you would say that to me i might punch you in the face afterwards.
    - yahna 9y ago
      > That simply not true, it's the slippery-slope fallacy. Observe: "When you let them take away any weapons, they'll take away all the weapons. Therefore, it should be my right to own nuclear weapons". It's not a slippery slope fallacy. It's the typical American view on free speech. VS say Canada where Nazi's aren't protected in spreading their hate.
  - oliwarner 9y ago
    Oh yeah! Let's hyper-simplify the socio-economic reasons Nazism got a footing into post-WW1 Germany. That'll help. You're trying to apply free speech to dealings with a private company. They're not a government though. You get your service from Google, et al, at their pleasure. If you break their terms, they're well within their rights to show you the door. Don't like their terms, use another company or DIY. We can chase the discrimination and protected-class-advantage rabbit down its hole, but really, this comes down to what Google (et al) considers criminal incitement to violence, which is a proven [1] exception to first amendment rights. Google doesn't have to prove things that far, but denying these violent racists their business is a good way to avoid becoming complicit. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imminent_lawless_action
willstrafach 9y ago
Probably a bad example there. If I recall correctly, sexual orientation is considered a protected class.
- rbanffy 9y ago
  And, as far as I know, the LGBT crowd never built gas chambers and ovens to more efficiently mass murder other groups. Nazis did.
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    It doesn't matter, free speech is free speech.

badwulf 9y ago

I hate nazis and fascists and any group that uses violence(and yeah that includes antifa and anarchists). I'm still not fine with private companies being judge jury and executioner. If they realise they can freely go after people, they might start doing it to further their advantage.