7 ms·

‘Shut the Site Down,’ Says 8chan’s Creator

72 points by empath75 7y ago

hestipod 7y ago
What is a workable answer when it comes to behavior and speech other than a rules based society with limits? I don't see truly oppressed people talking about this problem as the concept was meant to protect, I see people who want to be allowed to do and say whatever they feel like despite how it affects innocents. They hijack the intent for nefarious purpose. It's proven over and over that bad people abuse and take over platforms and societies that are entirely open. You cannot have entirely "free" speech without this problem. Any civilized society has to have limits and rules otherwise regular, calm, peaceful people are always suffering the effects of the aggressors. I've used the example before of a town with one place to eat. Someone comes in screaming and throwing poop at people. You cannot just "ignore" it. It ruins the place for others. So you choice is to suffer it or never go out to eat and socialize with other calm folks. Is that a proper price to pay so the screaming poop thrower doesn't feel oppressed? Is that really sensible? Sure long term you can build another diner at your own expense...but the screaming poop thrower will come there too and if you kick him out you are "censoring". You can also stay home. But you lose out on experience and peace to avoid the problem. But this seems to be the idea people who are entirely against any censorship or rules propose. "If you don't like it ignore it or move on". That doesn't work in the real world.
- tomp 7y ago
  I don’t see why it wouldn’t work online though. I think platforms like Twitter should adopt a “filter-list” like approach, where you could “unsubscribe” from different kinds of content / posters (e.g. “porn”, “gore”, “right-wing extremists”, “sci-fi enthusiasts”, etc.) - these lists could be generated both automatically (e.g. for porn), and / or manually moderated.
zaroth 7y ago
So literally everyone so much as reading 8chan/pol is on a watchlist, right? And what about the people posting they are about to “go kill as many brown people as they can find and they plan on being dead by the end of the day?” It’s a felony terroristic threat. How about we just arrest everyone posting terroristic threats before they can do this kind of damage? 8Chan, or whatever public forum these discussions are occurring on. I keep reading about blimps watching us 24/7, license plate readers tracking everywhere we drive. Either these terrorists have the best opsec imaginable, or the FBI agents watching the site should consider a new line of work. A guy like the El Paso shooter driving 9 hours to that city should have been stopped for a “broken tail light” long before he got to his destination. I find it nearly incomprehensible that the attacker was entirely unknown to the FBI, that they didn’t flag the manifesto, know who posted it, and have the means to know he was, at that very moment, on a long road-trip toward the border. I don’t personally know how long ahead of the attack the manifesto was posted, or if it was the attacker’s first post. Perhaps those details would mitigate somewhat my exasperation that this attack wasn’t foiled, but I suspect otherwise. EDIT: According to the NYT it was posted 19 minutes before the first 911 call came in. But Newsweek says an hour and a half.
- codesushi42 7y ago
  How is this realistic? How do you know he wasn't using Tor?
  - closeparen 7y ago
    People who post threats via Tor tend to get caught for being the only plausible suspect using Tor at the time of the threat.
- kpU8efre7r 7y ago
  >I keep reading about blimps watching us 24/7, license plate readers tracking everywhere we drive. It's almost as if this "surveillance state" you all imagine doesn't exist. There are checks in place and warrants needed for this. If you see something illegal online you could report it to the FBI perhaps?
  - brigandish 7y ago
    The ability to see something and stop it is not the same as the desire to see something and stop it.
    - kennywinker 7y ago
      The ability to collect something and the ability to see it are two different things. Just because data about this guy may have been snarfed up, doesn’t mean anybody looked at it.
  - Alex3917 7y ago
    > It's almost as if this "surveillance state" you all imagine doesn't exist. How do you imagine that billing for EZ Pass and license plate scanners works?
    - NikkiA 7y ago
      EZ-Pass is RFID based, it doesn't use license plate scanning but a transponder you have to have in your car (typically it's affixed to the windshield, but it doesn't need be)
rolph 7y ago
Ones moral constitution is supremely revealed in the manner of conduct chosen when no perceived consequences exist. e.g. Lord of The Flies.
- JackFr 7y ago
  There was a great quote from some WWII officer who said about war crimes (paraphrasing & I can’t remember his name) “We observe the rules of war not for the sake of our enemies, but for the sake of ourselves.”
pram 7y ago
What exactly makes 8chan the preferred platform for this kind of stuff, and not other websites? Genuinely curious, is it just because it’s unmoderated?
- Waterluvian 7y ago
  It's always possible that many sites were candidates given their traits. And one in a semi random manner became it.
  - kennywinker 7y ago
    Isn’t the story that all this crap was on 4chan, and then 8chan was created because 4chan started cracking down on this kinda stuff. It may be argued that 4chan’s existence gave a home to this crap, or that it created it. Hard to know one way or another.
    - NikkiA 7y ago
      4chan didn't create it, 4chan was created for speech that wasn't allowed on somethingawful, and before that there was ogrish and before that rotten.com & stileproject, before that? Probably alt.tasteless.
      - dinofacedude 7y ago
        Jeez, internet history is a rabbit hole.
      - 80386 7y ago
        > 4chan didn't create it, 4chan was created for speech that wasn't allowed on somethingawful 4chan was created by somethingawful users as an imitation of Japanese imageboards. It was used for speech that wasn't allowed on SA because it was right next door. Then SA decided it didn't like 4chan. Then SA's culture spread to magazines like Gawker and Buzzfeed, which is part of the reason 4chan is so unpopular now. If Gawker and Buzzfeed had hired from one side of the Harry Potter fandom, and if a handful of high-profile people like Zoe Quinn had come from it, we'd probably be hearing about how all of America's problems are caused by people who like Snape or whatever.
hndamien 7y ago
Seems like a honeypot for surveillance.
Simulacra 7y ago
It’s a distasteful site but I think it should stay. No speech should be silenced.
- Aloha 7y ago
  Historically very little speech could be made without social consequences, the internet broke that paradigm
  - happytoexplain 7y ago
    I think these two posts just about sum up the state of things and our disagreements at this time in history as succinctly as I could imagine.
    - Aloha 7y ago
      The question I keep asking is, how do we add those social consequences back into internet speech, without massive regulation, this I do not know the answer to yet.
  - flukus 7y ago
    Historically they put on white hoods and gathered in person, the internet only changed the game for relatively small but geographically dispersed groups. I wouldn't be surprised if this type of person still met predominantly IRL and 8chan is mostly a few loners, it tends to net be the most tech literate bunch of people.
    - jddj 7y ago
      The 'only' there is doing a lot of work. I don't have a citation for this, but my feeling is that historically, the majority of the people posting hate on social media aired their fringe views in much smaller and more direct social settings (the family dinner table, the pub, their barber/hairdresser) where instead of the reinforcement and gratification of many random upvotes from people in a similar situation or a vitriolic internet argument, they received either a fairly awkward smile and nod, a face-to-face rebuttal, genuine confirmation or (more likely) a mixture of the three. Or you call up talkback radio and blabber into the void, often being shut down by the host. A quick thought experiment: Imagine you're pissed off because you've become disenfranchised for whatever reason and you're looking for someone to blame and lash out towards. You don't have access to the internet. How much more effort would you have to put in to locate a similarly sized group of like-minded people who vehemently confirm and reinforce your views than you would now? How much more effective would the social filter which you encounter on the way be, remembering that every step of the way would mean real, rapport-inducing, face to face discussions with people who may disagree?
Buldak 7y ago
If 8chan is really committed to some kind of free speech absolutism, it makes me wonder why they removed the offending posts.
- tdxgx 7y ago
  8chan's owner allows free speech. The admin of each board can moderate as he pleases.
aaron695 7y ago
8Chan is exactly the same as it was two days ago. So either you're thick as two bricks or jumping on a outrage bandwagon unable to think for yourselves if these things are 'suddenly' important to you. Either way, unimpressive.
mdrzn 7y ago
Is there a way to read the NY Times? I can't be incognito, or in guest mode, and Outline says "not supported". Same shit with LA Times and the WP.
- dredmorbius 7y ago
  Disable JS.
neo4sure 7y ago
I' am celebrating right now...

72 points by empath75 7y ago

What is a workable answer when it comes to behavior and speech other than a rules based society with limits? I don't see truly oppressed people talking about this problem as the concept was meant to protect, I see people who want to be allowed to do and say whatever they feel like despite how it affects innocents. They hijack the intent for nefarious purpose. It's proven over and over that bad people abuse and take over platforms and societies that are entirely open. You cannot have entirely "free" speech without this problem. Any civilized society has to have limits and rules otherwise regular, calm, peaceful people are always suffering the effects of the aggressors. I've used the example before of a town with one place to eat. Someone comes in screaming and throwing poop at people. You cannot just "ignore" it. It ruins the place for others. So you choice is to suffer it or never go out to eat and socialize with other calm folks. Is that a proper price to pay so the screaming poop thrower doesn't feel oppressed? Is that really sensible? Sure long term you can build another diner at your own expense...but the screaming poop thrower will come there too and if you kick him out you are "censoring". You can also stay home. But you lose out on experience and peace to avoid the problem. But this seems to be the idea people who are entirely against any censorship or rules propose. "If you don't like it ignore it or move on". That doesn't work in the real world.

tomp 7y ago
I don’t see why it wouldn’t work online though. I think platforms like Twitter should adopt a “filter-list” like approach, where you could “unsubscribe” from different kinds of content / posters (e.g. “porn”, “gore”, “right-wing extremists”, “sci-fi enthusiasts”, etc.) - these lists could be generated both automatically (e.g. for porn), and / or manually moderated.

zaroth 7y ago

So literally everyone so much as reading 8chan/pol is on a watchlist, right? And what about the people posting they are about to “go kill as many brown people as they can find and they plan on being dead by the end of the day?” It’s a felony terroristic threat. How about we just arrest everyone posting terroristic threats before they can do this kind of damage? 8Chan, or whatever public forum these discussions are occurring on. I keep reading about blimps watching us 24/7, license plate readers tracking everywhere we drive. Either these terrorists have the best opsec imaginable, or the FBI agents watching the site should consider a new line of work. A guy like the El Paso shooter driving 9 hours to that city should have been stopped for a “broken tail light” long before he got to his destination. I find it nearly incomprehensible that the attacker was entirely unknown to the FBI, that they didn’t flag the manifesto, know who posted it, and have the means to know he was, at that very moment, on a long road-trip toward the border. I don’t personally know how long ahead of the attack the manifesto was posted, or if it was the attacker’s first post. Perhaps those details would mitigate somewhat my exasperation that this attack wasn’t foiled, but I suspect otherwise. EDIT: According to the NYT it was posted 19 minutes before the first 911 call came in. But Newsweek says an hour and a half.

codesushi42 7y ago
How is this realistic? How do you know he wasn't using Tor?
- closeparen 7y ago
  People who post threats via Tor tend to get caught for being the only plausible suspect using Tor at the time of the threat.
kpU8efre7r 7y ago
>I keep reading about blimps watching us 24/7, license plate readers tracking everywhere we drive. It's almost as if this "surveillance state" you all imagine doesn't exist. There are checks in place and warrants needed for this. If you see something illegal online you could report it to the FBI perhaps?
- brigandish 7y ago
  The ability to see something and stop it is not the same as the desire to see something and stop it.
  - kennywinker 7y ago
    The ability to collect something and the ability to see it are two different things. Just because data about this guy may have been snarfed up, doesn’t mean anybody looked at it.
- Alex3917 7y ago
  > It's almost as if this "surveillance state" you all imagine doesn't exist. How do you imagine that billing for EZ Pass and license plate scanners works?
  - NikkiA 7y ago
    EZ-Pass is RFID based, it doesn't use license plate scanning but a transponder you have to have in your car (typically it's affixed to the windshield, but it doesn't need be)

rolph 7y ago

Ones moral constitution is supremely revealed in the manner of conduct chosen when no perceived consequences exist. e.g. Lord of The Flies.

JackFr 7y ago
There was a great quote from some WWII officer who said about war crimes (paraphrasing & I can’t remember his name) “We observe the rules of war not for the sake of our enemies, but for the sake of ourselves.”

pram 7y ago

What exactly makes 8chan the preferred platform for this kind of stuff, and not other websites? Genuinely curious, is it just because it’s unmoderated?

Waterluvian 7y ago
It's always possible that many sites were candidates given their traits. And one in a semi random manner became it.
- kennywinker 7y ago
  Isn’t the story that all this crap was on 4chan, and then 8chan was created because 4chan started cracking down on this kinda stuff. It may be argued that 4chan’s existence gave a home to this crap, or that it created it. Hard to know one way or another.
  - NikkiA 7y ago
    4chan didn't create it, 4chan was created for speech that wasn't allowed on somethingawful, and before that there was ogrish and before that rotten.com & stileproject, before that? Probably alt.tasteless.
    - dinofacedude 7y ago
      Jeez, internet history is a rabbit hole.
    - 80386 7y ago
      > 4chan didn't create it, 4chan was created for speech that wasn't allowed on somethingawful 4chan was created by somethingawful users as an imitation of Japanese imageboards. It was used for speech that wasn't allowed on SA because it was right next door. Then SA decided it didn't like 4chan. Then SA's culture spread to magazines like Gawker and Buzzfeed, which is part of the reason 4chan is so unpopular now. If Gawker and Buzzfeed had hired from one side of the Harry Potter fandom, and if a handful of high-profile people like Zoe Quinn had come from it, we'd probably be hearing about how all of America's problems are caused by people who like Snape or whatever.

hndamien 7y ago

Seems like a honeypot for surveillance.

Simulacra 7y ago

It’s a distasteful site but I think it should stay. No speech should be silenced.

Aloha 7y ago
Historically very little speech could be made without social consequences, the internet broke that paradigm
- happytoexplain 7y ago
  I think these two posts just about sum up the state of things and our disagreements at this time in history as succinctly as I could imagine.
  - Aloha 7y ago
    The question I keep asking is, how do we add those social consequences back into internet speech, without massive regulation, this I do not know the answer to yet.
- flukus 7y ago
  Historically they put on white hoods and gathered in person, the internet only changed the game for relatively small but geographically dispersed groups. I wouldn't be surprised if this type of person still met predominantly IRL and 8chan is mostly a few loners, it tends to net be the most tech literate bunch of people.
  - jddj 7y ago
    The 'only' there is doing a lot of work. I don't have a citation for this, but my feeling is that historically, the majority of the people posting hate on social media aired their fringe views in much smaller and more direct social settings (the family dinner table, the pub, their barber/hairdresser) where instead of the reinforcement and gratification of many random upvotes from people in a similar situation or a vitriolic internet argument, they received either a fairly awkward smile and nod, a face-to-face rebuttal, genuine confirmation or (more likely) a mixture of the three. Or you call up talkback radio and blabber into the void, often being shut down by the host. A quick thought experiment: Imagine you're pissed off because you've become disenfranchised for whatever reason and you're looking for someone to blame and lash out towards. You don't have access to the internet. How much more effort would you have to put in to locate a similarly sized group of like-minded people who vehemently confirm and reinforce your views than you would now? How much more effective would the social filter which you encounter on the way be, remembering that every step of the way would mean real, rapport-inducing, face to face discussions with people who may disagree?

Buldak 7y ago

If 8chan is really committed to some kind of free speech absolutism, it makes me wonder why they removed the offending posts.

tdxgx 7y ago
8chan's owner allows free speech. The admin of each board can moderate as he pleases.

aaron695 7y ago

8Chan is exactly the same as it was two days ago. So either you're thick as two bricks or jumping on a outrage bandwagon unable to think for yourselves if these things are 'suddenly' important to you. Either way, unimpressive.

mdrzn 7y ago

Is there a way to read the NY Times? I can't be incognito, or in guest mode, and Outline says "not supported". Same shit with LA Times and the WP.

dredmorbius 7y ago
Disable JS.

neo4sure 7y ago

I' am celebrating right now...