4 ms·

New Zealand and Australia recently went on a "do something" tear regarding the mosque shooting. Sites where the video or manifesto was posted got blocked, inclu

New Zealand and Australia recently went on a "do something" tear regarding the mosque shooting. Sites where the video or manifesto was posted got blocked, including 4chan. And yes, you read that right, New Zealand made it a crime to distribute a specific piece of text data.

ShorsHammer 8y ago
Which if you read that "specific piece of text data" is the outcome the murderer wanted. They responded exactly how he desired.
- zapzupnz 8y ago
  The "this is what they wanted" argument is always something that rings alarm bells in my head; it sounds like the "it's a slippery slope" wolf in sheep's clothing.
  - collyw 8y ago
    You hear it a lot, but in this case he pretty much outlined it in his manifesto.
    - lumberjack 8y ago
      Why are you taking his word at face value? What he really wants is to spread his propaganda. He is just trying to use reverse psychology to make you do just that.
- simias 8y ago
  Who cares about what that guy wanted or didn't want. The question is whether we should let people distribute his manifesto for the sake of freedom of expression or if we consider it to be dangerous and worthy of a ban. The opinion of the guy who committed this heinous crime is frankly irrelevant IMO. If I was to commit some atrocities tomorrow and write a pamphlet outlining my motive and calling for others to do the same thing while adding a note saying "look, they'll try to censor this!" will you, out of principle, argue that my manifesto shouldn't be censured because that's what I would've wanted? If so, why?
  - FeepingCreature 8y ago
    Eh, if a murderous white supremacist has a strategy we should at least ask if the strategy can work before we exactly play into it.
    - simias 8y ago
      You're giving a lot of credit to a meme-spouting serial killer. It's not like as if it was step 34 of his master plan, he merely got a gun and started shooting at innocent people. I'll take my chances and keep ignoring him and not giving him a platform. In my opinion his main objective was to get attention and put his nauseous ideology in the spotlight. I don't know if banning it is the right solution but frankly I won't waste my time playing devil's advocate for a mass murderer. "First they came for the terrorists and I did nothing because I wasn't a terrorist... And nothing of value was lost".
      - reitanqild 8y ago
        > I'll take my chances and keep ignoring him and not giving him a platform. Hopefully society will not do that. The content might be repulsive but we are better off knowing how they think than allowing only them to know the contents. Crazy manifestos are probably just like weapons in this regard, ordinary people won't care to get one if they are illegal, bad guys will. As a kid I got a good explanation of how badly certain ideologies failed even if they looked reasonable. I also got an intro to safe handling of guns, especially the part about never ever pointing a gun at anyone, loaded or not, except in wartime. I was quite young then but it sticks, like a whole lot of other stuff from my childhood. I'll try to give that to the next generation together, together with an explanation of how insanely stupid such manifestos are - and a crash course in unarmed fighting (disable or confuse opponent, get away). Young people should know what exists or it will take them by surprise. > "First they came for the terrorists and I did nothing because I wasn't a terrorist... And nothing of value was lost". Definitions of "terrorist" differs and while I and you can agree on this and many others I really really don't want to have more power than necessary in the hands of any government. Read history and you'll see that most cruelties in the last few hundred years were commited by states against their own citizens, not by random blokes with weapons.
beezischillin 8y ago
They also blocked Dissenter, a comments system which doesn’t host anything or even allow image uploads.

ShorsHammer 8y ago

Which if you read that "specific piece of text data" is the outcome the murderer wanted. They responded exactly how he desired.

zapzupnz 8y ago
The "this is what they wanted" argument is always something that rings alarm bells in my head; it sounds like the "it's a slippery slope" wolf in sheep's clothing.
- collyw 8y ago
  You hear it a lot, but in this case he pretty much outlined it in his manifesto.
  - lumberjack 8y ago
    Why are you taking his word at face value? What he really wants is to spread his propaganda. He is just trying to use reverse psychology to make you do just that.
simias 8y ago
Who cares about what that guy wanted or didn't want. The question is whether we should let people distribute his manifesto for the sake of freedom of expression or if we consider it to be dangerous and worthy of a ban. The opinion of the guy who committed this heinous crime is frankly irrelevant IMO. If I was to commit some atrocities tomorrow and write a pamphlet outlining my motive and calling for others to do the same thing while adding a note saying "look, they'll try to censor this!" will you, out of principle, argue that my manifesto shouldn't be censured because that's what I would've wanted? If so, why?
- FeepingCreature 8y ago
  Eh, if a murderous white supremacist has a strategy we should at least ask if the strategy can work before we exactly play into it.
  - simias 8y ago
    You're giving a lot of credit to a meme-spouting serial killer. It's not like as if it was step 34 of his master plan, he merely got a gun and started shooting at innocent people. I'll take my chances and keep ignoring him and not giving him a platform. In my opinion his main objective was to get attention and put his nauseous ideology in the spotlight. I don't know if banning it is the right solution but frankly I won't waste my time playing devil's advocate for a mass murderer. "First they came for the terrorists and I did nothing because I wasn't a terrorist... And nothing of value was lost".
    - reitanqild 8y ago
      > I'll take my chances and keep ignoring him and not giving him a platform. Hopefully society will not do that. The content might be repulsive but we are better off knowing how they think than allowing only them to know the contents. Crazy manifestos are probably just like weapons in this regard, ordinary people won't care to get one if they are illegal, bad guys will. As a kid I got a good explanation of how badly certain ideologies failed even if they looked reasonable. I also got an intro to safe handling of guns, especially the part about never ever pointing a gun at anyone, loaded or not, except in wartime. I was quite young then but it sticks, like a whole lot of other stuff from my childhood. I'll try to give that to the next generation together, together with an explanation of how insanely stupid such manifestos are - and a crash course in unarmed fighting (disable or confuse opponent, get away). Young people should know what exists or it will take them by surprise. > "First they came for the terrorists and I did nothing because I wasn't a terrorist... And nothing of value was lost". Definitions of "terrorist" differs and while I and you can agree on this and many others I really really don't want to have more power than necessary in the hands of any government. Read history and you'll see that most cruelties in the last few hundred years were commited by states against their own citizens, not by random blokes with weapons.

beezischillin 8y ago

They also blocked Dissenter, a comments system which doesn’t host anything or even allow image uploads.