4 ms·

Refusing to host a website is a form of violence? What?

by earl 16y ago

InclinedPlane 16y ago
No, removing hosting of a website is though. Imagine a comparable scenario: an independent newspaper is renting a printing press, they aren't behind on rent but the provider decides they don't like what the paper is printing so they repossess the printing press. That's definitely a form of violence, even if it isn't physical violence (in the same manner that publicly burning another religion's holy text is a form of violence).
- scott_s 16y ago
  I think using the word violence to describe those actions dilutes its meaning. edit: I disagree with the parent's point, but the post is civil and is a valid part of the discussion. Please do not downvote it because you disagree with it.
  - InclinedPlane 16y ago
    I think burning Korans, or burning crosses, or burning any books certainly classify as violent acts. I doubt many people would argue otherwise. By the same token, removing an organization's website hosting is also a violent act, though of a different and certainly less serious sort. If Rackspace (or whomever) yanked EFF's website from the web I suspect a lot of people would implicitly appreciate the violence inherent in that event. I'm not trying to defend these scumbags, they are scumbags and what they are doing is wrong. But Rackspace is also in the wrong (though on a much different plane). The way to deal with assholes shouting hate on the street corner is not to kick the soap box out from under them and smash it with an axe. It may be satisfying, but it's ultimately unproductive.
    - scott_s 16y ago
      I only used the word "violence" when it involves physical harm. I find words are most useful when they have narrow meaning (http://lesswrong.com/lw/ic/the_virtue_of_narrowness/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/ic/the_virtue_of_narrowness/). Regarding your second point, also note that I am not advocating making their speech illegal. What I'm recognizing is that others might not want to be associated with it, or enable it in any way. If, for example, I had a venue of some kind, and I was approached by Neo-Nazis to hold a rally, I'd refuse. I can't maintain that position while also faulting Rackspace.

Refusing to host a website is a form of violence? What?

by earl 16y ago

Refusing to host a website is a form of violence? What?

No, removing hosting of a website is though. Imagine a comparable scenario: an independent newspaper is renting a printing press, they aren't behind on rent but the provider decides they don't like what the paper is printing so they repossess the printing press. That's definitely a form of violence, even if it isn't physical violence (in the same manner that publicly burning another religion's holy text is a form of violence).

scott_s 16y ago
I think using the word violence to describe those actions dilutes its meaning. edit: I disagree with the parent's point, but the post is civil and is a valid part of the discussion. Please do not downvote it because you disagree with it.
- InclinedPlane 16y ago
  I think burning Korans, or burning crosses, or burning any books certainly classify as violent acts. I doubt many people would argue otherwise. By the same token, removing an organization's website hosting is also a violent act, though of a different and certainly less serious sort. If Rackspace (or whomever) yanked EFF's website from the web I suspect a lot of people would implicitly appreciate the violence inherent in that event. I'm not trying to defend these scumbags, they are scumbags and what they are doing is wrong. But Rackspace is also in the wrong (though on a much different plane). The way to deal with assholes shouting hate on the street corner is not to kick the soap box out from under them and smash it with an axe. It may be satisfying, but it's ultimately unproductive.
  - scott_s 16y ago
    I only used the word "violence" when it involves physical harm. I find words are most useful when they have narrow meaning (http://lesswrong.com/lw/ic/the_virtue_of_narrowness/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/ic/the_virtue_of_narrowness/). Regarding your second point, also note that I am not advocating making their speech illegal. What I'm recognizing is that others might not want to be associated with it, or enable it in any way. If, for example, I had a venue of some kind, and I was approached by Neo-Nazis to hold a rally, I'd refuse. I can't maintain that position while also faulting Rackspace.