5 ms·
That a crazy person posts a screed somewhere then commits mass murder is not by itself sufficient reason to destroy the forum where they posted their screed. I
by cryptonector 7y ago
That a crazy person posts a screed somewhere then commits mass murder is not by itself sufficient reason to destroy the forum where they posted their screed. It's not remotely clear to me that 8chan glorified previous mass murders -- of course, I've not looked, but then, Cloudflare doesn't post any evidence of this either. But even 8chan they did, that's essentially what the media is doing every time they give wall-to-wall coverage to any mass murder -- future would be mass murderers may fantasize about being the one the news media talk about next. No one talks about de-platforming CNN. Before we deplatform the 8chans of the world, at the very least we should have some evidence of how they failed to moderate content, and we should give them a chance to fix it.
- DanBC 7y agoWhat evidence do you have that they were "crazy"? Most people who commit mass murders are not "crazy" - they don't have psychosis, they know what they're doing, they plan the attack.
- cryptonector 7y agoIn my book anyone who would commit a mass murder is "crazy". I did not call the shooter a schizophrenic, or a psychopath, did I? "Crazy" is a colloquial term, not a medical one. That said, anyone who would kill random innocent people qualifies as a sociopath at the very least.
- runeks 7y ago> What evidence do you have that they were "crazy"? They murdered dozens of innocent people. No one’s saying they were psychotic, necessarily.
- dangxiaopin 7y agoAccording to Cloudflare's logic, ISPs should have stopped peering with Facebook after NZ shooter livestreamed there.
- cryptonector 7y agoPerhaps only if commenters glorified it? I'm sure you can find people to do that on FB or anywhere else, and it may take time to moderate such commentary. But no one would deplatform FB or Twitter -- they're too big. This approach means we have a powerful dynamic in place to limit the reach of any social media that isn't already "too big to deplatform".
- yhamv 7y agoIn fact Facebook said they didn't remove the nz shooter livestream because nobody bothered to report it until very late
- dangxiaopin 7y agoI would argue that the actual graphic livestream of a real mass murder is a much much more toxic and dangerous material than any theoretical manifesto. It's not even in the same league. But Facebook is too big to be dropped as a customer!
- ElCapitanMarkla 7y agoIs Facebook a customer? I thought they had their own network?
- yhamv 7y agoPretty sure they are customers of several CDNs.
- cryptonector 7y agoMaybe not, but others could refuse to peer with them.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- 7y ago
- KozmoNau7 7y agoUsers on 8chan (and Kiwifarms and similar sites) very specifically rile up hatred, they are frighteningly good at radicalizing frustrated young men. They regularly praise previous mass murderers and goad others into doing the same.
- cryptonector 7y agoI've no idea. I've never visited the site. Elsewhere in this thread it is said that they clearly jest -- I wouldn't jest about such things, but without seeing the content in question I can't say how questionable it is.
- KozmoNau7 7y agoThere is a very good reason why those manifestos were shared on 8chan, and it's because a significant amount of posters do not post those things in jest.
- systemtest 7y agoSo what you are saying is that 8chan has the same content as certain Facebook groups. Why not drop Facebook?
- hoseja 7y agoBecause it's much easier to succeed (and feel really good afterwards) in bullying the small deformed guy.
- throwaway-hn123 7y agoYou mean the "small deformed guy" who left 8chan years ago and is now literally advocating that the site should be shut down? Is that who you mean?
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- zouhair 7y ago> of course, I've not looked So go look, it would not take you much (site down for now though, for obvious reasons). I did it back with the Christchurch terrorist attack and won't do it again it's so vile and that's a euphemism.
- cryptonector 7y agoHow? They're being deplatformed.
- throwaway5752 7y agoThat is not what CF or any CDN does, and that's not what "deplatformed" means. If you toss it around like that, it won't be clear that it has a precise meaning and people will think it's a phrase that is thrown around to coerce people to unwillingly associate with people and organizations they don't want to associate with.
- cryptonector 7y agoHow is your CDN abandoning you not deplatforming you? Can they get another CDN? When they do I'll give the site a look-see.
- latexr 7y ago> No one talks about de-platforming CNN. Roger Ebert[1], Tristan Harris[2], and others argue that the way CNN (and others) covers these events incentivises further occurrences. [1]: https://boingboing.net/2012/12/15/roger-ebert-on-how-the-press-r.html https://boingboing.net/2012/12/15/roger-ebert-on-how-the-pre... [2]: I’m having trouble finding the video amongst the flood of news reports from the recent events.
- cryptonector 7y agoBut do they propose that CNN be deplatformed?
- elbrian 7y agoThe definition of the word `deplatform` is: > To prevent someone from utilizing a platform to express their opinion. CloudFlare is not a platform for expressing opinions. As such, 8chan was not deplatformed... so what point are you really trying to make, here?