6 ms·

This is a great example of how 'just set up your own platform' may not be the best solution to issues of censorship and what not. Because if you do, then the pl

by CM30 8y ago

This is a great example of how 'just set up your own platform' may not be the best solution to issues of censorship and what not. Because if you do, then the platforms you need for things like payment processing are also likely to ban your service for much the same reasons as before, and neutral alternatives to them are few and far between. Still, I guess this does provide a good use case for cryptocurrencies and what not.

buboard 8y ago
but they didn't set up their own platform, instead they relied on patreon.
- justAnotherNET 8y ago
  The platform they were attempting to replace is youtube. How do you replace one platform when all the others conspire to prevent you from doing so? You can't just bootstrap your own internet... at some level you're using other's stuff
- bdcravens 8y ago
  I believe "platform" in this context refers to the content platform. (just a fancy way of saying host your own website instead of distributing via Youtube) edit: Looks like they're more than just a "website", but both this site and the platform site really don't do a good job of explaining that.
  - buboard 8y ago
    the platform is incomplete. It's pretty obvious nowadays that any platform that makes free speech its main selling point will be ousted by every payment processor.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- cft 8y ago
  They did not lay their own fiber either. Where do you draw that boundary?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - buboard 8y ago
    the main ways to censor seem to be DNS, payments and hosting. I have not heard yet about cutting people's fiber. So, a platform that wants to be resistant to censorship should probably provide all 3
  - programmarchy 8y ago
    Setting up a new government?
interesthrow2 8y ago
> This is a great example of how 'just set up your own platform' may not be the best solution to issues of censorship and what not. It's more like "don't depends on Silicon valley's ecosystem" these days. Because all these tech corporations went crazy since Trump got elected and clearly decided they'll use their audience and market shares for political goals... which they have all the rights to do by the way, and it's actually a good thing, if leads to a more diverse landscape of tech services. There are opportunities for competition but still a lack of VC that can fund that competition... EDIT: I obviously do not support violent or "racist" views. But since now even radical feminists get booted out of social media and what not because they don't subscribe to a specific ideology, it proves that at the end of the day it has nothing to do with "fighting Nazis".
- apostacy 8y ago
  It's a bit more than that. The top decision makers at Visa and Mastercard have been threatening anyone who does business with certain people. That's where this is coming from. And if you aren't terrified of that you damn well should be. Ironically I think that Trump would LOVE to deploy this against his enemies. Perhaps he will at some point. That's why we need to strengthen political and financial "common carriage".
smsm42 8y ago
"Set up your own platform" is actually "set up your own Internet". Because otherwise you'd need DNS, hosting, payment processing, CDN, certificates, etc. And given how rapidly this sphere is politicized and weaponized by people with an ax to grind, if you're doing something that somebody vocal objects to - or allow somebody that does to use your resources - or allow somebody that allows somebody, etc. - then you'd better build your own Internet. Because this one is fresh out of freedom.
- chowells 8y ago
  What part of "anyone can force you to do business with them" sounds like freedom to you? Don't payment vendors and hosting platforms have freedom? Part of freedom is the responsibility to accept consequences of your actions. If you choose to say such vile things that people quit doing business with you, that's just people exercising their freedom. If you think it's unfair, you are valuing your freedom higher than everyone else's. When you complain about "deplatforming" you aren't asking for more freedom. You're asking for the freedom of others to be removed.
  - fvdessen 8y ago
    Do you support the freedom to deplatform practicing Jews as well ?
  - blfr 8y ago
    I'm not all that concerned with monopolists' and near monopolists' freedoms to be honest. VISA isn't some family-run corner store.
  - smsm42 8y ago
    > What part of "anyone can force you to do business with them" sounds like freedom to you? The part where activist mobs can force you not to do business with people targeted by the mobs. > Part of freedom is the responsibility to accept consequences of your actions. That's a meaningless platitude - being personally destroyed or run out of business merely because somebody set a hate mob on you is not "consequences of your actions". This is creating climate of hate and intolerance, and that's in substantial the climate we're living in now. Some time ago, it was "if you don't like it - don't read it". Now it's "if you don't like it - destroy his life, his business, and anybody he is associated and does business with". Describing it as "accept consequences" is either extremely naive or disingenuous. I certainly do not want and will not accept such climate of permanent war as something proper. > You're asking for the freedom of others to be removed. No I did not. My comments are just above that, and anybody reading them can clearly see I have not asked for any freedoms to be removed. If you're going to distort my opinions, it's probably not smart to do it right next to it - too obvious.
spookthesunset 8y ago
> censorship Except in this case it isn't censorship. Nobody can be forced to do business with BitChute if they don't want to. That is just as much of a right as anything else. BitChute is still more than able to host all the trash it wants. They will just have to find another payment provider. And they do exist. I mean, porn sites manage to figure out how to collect payment. It's expensive as hell because people constantly chargeback porn and virtually every porn hoster is sketchy as fuck too. Even then they could just get a PO box and have people mail in checks or hell, even cash. It might be old school, but that is how it was done back when all the wackos and conspiracy newsletters were actual things you got in the mail.
- wpietri 8y ago
  Exactly. Somebody's freedom of speech does not override a service provider freedom of association. Freedom of speech is not a right to distribution and payment.
  - apostacy 8y ago
    These are not merely service providers. They are de-facto utilities. Just because Verizon does not like your politics, does not mean they can cut you off from their services. Same with Wells Fargo denying you a checking account (although they certainly did try in the past, if they thought you were a labor organizer). Patreon, and other payment processors (like Stripe.com) are having their arms twisted from the highest levels by Visa and Mastercard. Think for a moment if it would be ok with you if Visa and Mastercard were doing this because they wanted to silence people who advocated for women's rights. Would you still be so libertarian about it?
    - wpietri 8y ago
      Verizon is a monopoly, and should be tightly regulated. Patreon is definitely not. And there's no particular reason here to think that Patreon is doing this under pressure from Visa. They were under plenty of pressure from their user base. I think there's also a fundamental difference between an organization that bans people who increase the rights of marginalized groups and one that bans people that are looking to further marginalize people, so your analogy doesn't do anything for me.
ctyptopat08 8y ago
are also likely to ban your service for much the same reasons

by CM30 8y ago

buboard 8y ago

but they didn't set up their own platform, instead they relied on patreon.

justAnotherNET 8y ago
The platform they were attempting to replace is youtube. How do you replace one platform when all the others conspire to prevent you from doing so? You can't just bootstrap your own internet... at some level you're using other's stuff
bdcravens 8y ago
I believe "platform" in this context refers to the content platform. (just a fancy way of saying host your own website instead of distributing via Youtube) edit: Looks like they're more than just a "website", but both this site and the platform site really don't do a good job of explaining that.
- buboard 8y ago
  the platform is incomplete. It's pretty obvious nowadays that any platform that makes free speech its main selling point will be ousted by every payment processor.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
cft 8y ago
They did not lay their own fiber either. Where do you draw that boundary?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- buboard 8y ago
  the main ways to censor seem to be DNS, payments and hosting. I have not heard yet about cutting people's fiber. So, a platform that wants to be resistant to censorship should probably provide all 3
- programmarchy 8y ago
  Setting up a new government?

interesthrow2 8y ago

> This is a great example of how 'just set up your own platform' may not be the best solution to issues of censorship and what not. It's more like "don't depends on Silicon valley's ecosystem" these days. Because all these tech corporations went crazy since Trump got elected and clearly decided they'll use their audience and market shares for political goals... which they have all the rights to do by the way, and it's actually a good thing, if leads to a more diverse landscape of tech services. There are opportunities for competition but still a lack of VC that can fund that competition... EDIT: I obviously do not support violent or "racist" views. But since now even radical feminists get booted out of social media and what not because they don't subscribe to a specific ideology, it proves that at the end of the day it has nothing to do with "fighting Nazis".

apostacy 8y ago
It's a bit more than that. The top decision makers at Visa and Mastercard have been threatening anyone who does business with certain people. That's where this is coming from. And if you aren't terrified of that you damn well should be. Ironically I think that Trump would LOVE to deploy this against his enemies. Perhaps he will at some point. That's why we need to strengthen political and financial "common carriage".

smsm42 8y ago

"Set up your own platform" is actually "set up your own Internet". Because otherwise you'd need DNS, hosting, payment processing, CDN, certificates, etc. And given how rapidly this sphere is politicized and weaponized by people with an ax to grind, if you're doing something that somebody vocal objects to - or allow somebody that does to use your resources - or allow somebody that allows somebody, etc. - then you'd better build your own Internet. Because this one is fresh out of freedom.

chowells 8y ago
What part of "anyone can force you to do business with them" sounds like freedom to you? Don't payment vendors and hosting platforms have freedom? Part of freedom is the responsibility to accept consequences of your actions. If you choose to say such vile things that people quit doing business with you, that's just people exercising their freedom. If you think it's unfair, you are valuing your freedom higher than everyone else's. When you complain about "deplatforming" you aren't asking for more freedom. You're asking for the freedom of others to be removed.
- fvdessen 8y ago
  Do you support the freedom to deplatform practicing Jews as well ?
- blfr 8y ago
  I'm not all that concerned with monopolists' and near monopolists' freedoms to be honest. VISA isn't some family-run corner store.
- smsm42 8y ago
  > What part of "anyone can force you to do business with them" sounds like freedom to you? The part where activist mobs can force you not to do business with people targeted by the mobs. > Part of freedom is the responsibility to accept consequences of your actions. That's a meaningless platitude - being personally destroyed or run out of business merely because somebody set a hate mob on you is not "consequences of your actions". This is creating climate of hate and intolerance, and that's in substantial the climate we're living in now. Some time ago, it was "if you don't like it - don't read it". Now it's "if you don't like it - destroy his life, his business, and anybody he is associated and does business with". Describing it as "accept consequences" is either extremely naive or disingenuous. I certainly do not want and will not accept such climate of permanent war as something proper. > You're asking for the freedom of others to be removed. No I did not. My comments are just above that, and anybody reading them can clearly see I have not asked for any freedoms to be removed. If you're going to distort my opinions, it's probably not smart to do it right next to it - too obvious.

spookthesunset 8y ago

> censorship Except in this case it isn't censorship. Nobody can be forced to do business with BitChute if they don't want to. That is just as much of a right as anything else. BitChute is still more than able to host all the trash it wants. They will just have to find another payment provider. And they do exist. I mean, porn sites manage to figure out how to collect payment. It's expensive as hell because people constantly chargeback porn and virtually every porn hoster is sketchy as fuck too. Even then they could just get a PO box and have people mail in checks or hell, even cash. It might be old school, but that is how it was done back when all the wackos and conspiracy newsletters were actual things you got in the mail.

wpietri 8y ago
Exactly. Somebody's freedom of speech does not override a service provider freedom of association. Freedom of speech is not a right to distribution and payment.
- apostacy 8y ago
  These are not merely service providers. They are de-facto utilities. Just because Verizon does not like your politics, does not mean they can cut you off from their services. Same with Wells Fargo denying you a checking account (although they certainly did try in the past, if they thought you were a labor organizer). Patreon, and other payment processors (like Stripe.com) are having their arms twisted from the highest levels by Visa and Mastercard. Think for a moment if it would be ok with you if Visa and Mastercard were doing this because they wanted to silence people who advocated for women's rights. Would you still be so libertarian about it?
  - wpietri 8y ago
    Verizon is a monopoly, and should be tightly regulated. Patreon is definitely not. And there's no particular reason here to think that Patreon is doing this under pressure from Visa. They were under plenty of pressure from their user base. I think there's also a fundamental difference between an organization that bans people who increase the rights of marginalized groups and one that bans people that are looking to further marginalize people, so your analogy doesn't do anything for me.

ctyptopat08 8y ago

are also likely to ban your service for much the same reasons