23 ms·

Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

114 points by anon20190221 6y ago

Simulacra 6y ago
Technical question: Is it possible to build a service/platform that cannot be silenced? I was thinking about Starlink and how if Musk wanted to they could make it resistant to censorship, but theoretically speaking, it would still be possible in the extreme to bring that platform down. So that raised the question in my mind: What would it take to make a platform bullet proof from censorship?
- anon20190221 6y ago
  Well, some government can decide to outlaw cryptography, jam radio (this includes Starlink, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth etc.), but you can still use something like Sneakernet. So I'd argue it's possible, but one need to choose their friends very carefully.
makeworld 6y ago
Interesting. Have you heard of Aether though? It seems a lot simpler, but achieving the same result. It's a flood network, I believe. https://getaether.net/ https://getaether.net/
- TeaDude 6y ago
  Hmm. This seems like an interesting protocol. Not a big fan of the whole mod election approach though. Seems like it might just turn into a constant scramble for power. Still, the front page does seem to imply mods can only sorta block content so it might not be too bad. Thank you for suggesting this.
- anon20190221 6y ago
  Looks interesting. Unfortunately, flooding does not scale, its cost is O(n²) where n is the number of participants. The saddest part is that if they were to switch to a less bandwidth-crippling scheme (such as GossipSub), that would destroy the whole purpose because malicious agents can start soliciting messages, and given there is no premix layer on top, time to reveal your identity is going to start approaching zero.
  - thu2111 6y ago
    That scaling argument assumes everyone pays the global network cost per node, which isn't true. Gossip scales because the cost to each participant is O(connections to my node), not O(connections in the whole network), and it's the per-participant cost that gets paid.
kragen 6y ago
Empty repo.
- anon20190221 6y ago
  The referenced blog post explains why. The author has just started.
  - kragen 6y ago
    Without code, "I am building a service no one can silence" is an empty boast. Moreover, it's an empty boast that could stimulate opposition, like running toward a heavily armed border checkpoint screaming "I have a gun!". So it's best seen as trolling.
- johntash 6y ago
  Empty repo, except for the readme with donation links.
gchamonlive 6y ago
In a tolerant society, should we tolerate intolerance? I am genuinely interested to hear your thoughts.
- chrissnell 6y ago
  We should tolerate all speech. That doesn't mean you can't scream and call it hate speech, but do so from your own platform.
  - cmeacham98 6y ago
    What about libel/slander? What about child pornography? What about doxxing? Surely you agree we have to draw the line _somewhere_, even if you disagree with where we currently draw it?
    - falcolas 6y ago
      > What about child pornography? It's amusing how frequently this comes up. If someone distributes child pornography, arrest them using the existing laws of the land. "But what if it spreads from there?" I hear someone saying. Well, they're still posting illegal content, so arrest them too. It's silly to assume that the freedom of speech implies some kind of inherent free pass from consequences of your speech.
      - danaris 6y ago
        I think what you're missing in this is that the only reason that stands is because images of child pornography, which would otherwise be considered protected speech just like any other image, have been declared to be illegal. It's not that "there are laws against child pornography, which are completely separate from the debate about free speech." Laws against the production of (actual) child pornography are irrelevant to the debate about free speech. Laws against its distribution are absolutely relevant, because "distribution of child pornography" is just a kind of speech. (To be clear, I oppose free-speech maximalism in general, and have no trouble with the idea of laws criminalizing the distribution of child pornography.)
arkitaip 6y ago
"You see, freedom of speech and expression must be absolute." This is a very ignorant take on freedom of speech and a terrible foundation for your project.
- threevox 6y ago
  "Ignorant" == you can't be bothered to come up with a genuine refutation
  - tclancy 6y ago
    Watch: this is some white dude worrying that white dudes might be silenced. Show me all the money trying to make marginalized voices heard and then you cannot fuck off into the multiverse like whichever anime show you Stan but don’t respect.
    - LocalH 6y ago
      Stop equating strong freedom-of-speech ideals with racism. Nobody should be silenced unless they are directly inciting violence. Remember, any exceptions can be twisted around as social norms change.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - krapp 6y ago
        >Nobody should be silenced unless they are directly inciting violence. >Remember, any exceptions can be twisted around as social norms change. If no exceptions to free speech can be allowed because they could possibly be twisted, then neither can the exception for directly inciting violence. Absolute means absolute.
  - AgentOrange1234 6y ago
    How about: drumming up hatred and demonizing people has a long history of terrible consequences, e.g., rwanda, nazi germany, kkk, ...
tovej 6y ago
"You see, freedom of speech and expression must be absolute." That's pretty extreme. First, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence of speech. And second, freedom of speech only applies to public forums. Why would a private enterprise need to put up with someone spreading vitriol and fake news? Let's say I own a mall, and you rent a store in that mall. You suddenly decide that you are going to start selling Nazi merch and incite people to riot in my mall. Why am I a "cancel culture SJW" if I kick you out of my mall?
- jimbob45 6y ago
  What if you exclusively kick all blacks out of your mall? Under your rules, that should be indiscriminately allowed.
  - tovej 6y ago
    My rules (society's rules) are entirely orthogonal to the issue of discrimination against groups of people. If individuals do not follow the rules, they should be punished, that's fine. If you apply the rules differently depending on what group a person belongs to, that's not ok. ... but that has nothing to do with my comment (I can't believe I have to explain this).
  - Arainach 6y ago
    Discrimination based on what someone is is wrong and illegal. That's why we have protected classes for race, gender, sexuality, age, and so on. Discrimination based on people's words and actions is how society functions. It's perfectly legal. This isn't even about politics. If you think people refusing to do business with white supremacists, insurrectionists, and racists is discriminating against a political party, that says a lot about that political party. No one's getting deplatformed for talking about deregulation or free trade.
- barbacoa 6y ago
  People do have free speech rights at private owned malls. Not sure if that would apply to stores but courts have ruled it does apply to people at malls (and other public areas that are privately owned). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v....
jimbob45 6y ago
> There is a huge misunderstanding, Pepe the Frog has always been a symbol of resistance in underground culture, it was journalists who decided it was evil without understanding a damn thing. It’s not a symbol of resistance. It’s a glum-looking frog. That’s it. Also this forum doesn’t seem to allow for identifying oneself which precludes it from competing with Parler/Twitter. At best, it can compete with 4ch/8kun but those serve their (admittedly limited) purpose quite well with few complaints these days.
- belimawr 6y ago
  First time hearing Pepe as a symbol of resistance. Saw it first as "Feels good man" before it turned into edgy alt-right symbol.
  - nerdponx 6y ago
    4chan was always kind of the "home" of Pepe memes, so it was kind of natural that the racists, incels, and other "alt-right" denizens of 4chan made (and still make) extensive use of Pepe and consider it "their own" to some extent. But the whole thing about specifically making Pepe into an alt-right symbol was just some shit they stirred up to "troll" the media. It worked, and the stigma stuck. A lot of Pepe memes also ended up becoming Twitch emotes through BetterTwitchTV and FrankerFaceZ. And a lot of those emotes found their way into Discord chatrooms. In Discord, you can usually tell whether someone is an alt-right person or not by what Pepe emotes they use.
ThomW 6y ago
Parler is a shit hole, and at this point I’m not sure we need another social network anything. The major ones do a lousy job of policing fake news and misinformation, and from your tone it sounds like you support that garbage. I’m pretty sure giving every moron on earth a globally-accessible soapbox is about the stupidest idea humankind has ever had.
- drukenemo 6y ago
  The first problem it pops-out when I read your comment is that you are sure your opinions represent the good and opinions that go against yours are objectively the evil. Censoring what is not what you want to express is thus virtuous. Imagine for a moment that this platform would be against calling for “censoring morons” and thus your comment banned.
  - ThomW 6y ago
    If the same folks who believe that building a bulletproof Parler is a good idea think I'm a moron, I think I'm in a pretty good position morally.
- tanseydavid 6y ago
  These exact same things were said about the printing-press when it was the epitome of new, high-technology.
  - mlindner 6y ago
    Before the printing press came out, literally no one had a voice. It was simply too expensive. Printing press actually allowed some people to have a voice, but you still needed money to fund it. Going back to an era where you need money to have a voice wouldn't be a bad idea. A good start would be to outlaw any social network from also running an ad network, for-pay social networks only. Then I'd know only people who actually cared would be saying things.
- bilbo0s 6y ago
  Who was the guy who said, "There's no such thing as a 'stupid' idea, only great ideas that go horribly wrong." It's all about the context, and having the requisite creativity to see the drawbacks on the horizon. I think social media and surveillance marketing are good examples of what he was probably talking about. (Actually, IIRC, the quote was in relation to dating strippers, but you get the idea.)
loceng 6y ago
Will it prevent blocking others from replying to counter irrational, unreasonable thinking - or say, if someone's promoting violence - can others be able to comment to try to quell, calm the anger - or will individuals be able to censor whomever they like which is arguably as bad as deplatforming?
- drusepth 6y ago
  >What is fundamentally different with Pepe is moderation. Instead of relying on a centralized entity with a banhammer, each board and thread owner may anonymously moderate their spaces on their own. However, nothing can actually be deleted, it can only be shadowed, and each user decides whether they want to see the light or the full version of the page at any moment in time. People can still reply to shadowed posts inside their own shadowed posts, so no one cannot silence anyone, only maintain order on the light side.
  - hexadec 6y ago
    This begs the question, which is the default: light or full. You cannot claim to support freedom of speech and have this capacity in my opinion. It is implicitly saying some voices are less valid. It is an interesting project technically, but I do not think it will replace the *chan model for edgy people to be edgy on the internet. If your opinions are so extreme that you feel that you must be anonymous and free from repercussions, they may be terrible opinions in the eyes of society.
    - loceng 6y ago
      I think the issue, if there ever becomes a protocol allowing for full freedom of speech, is that of time-resource management: if you know a certain user just isn't responsive or open to listening to reason - closed heart, closed mind - blind in rage like the boar demons in Princess Mononoke. I believe there needs to be a system to tag such individuals and then some sort of intervention in-person - we're not going to work through people's anger and build trust, relationship, with them online. I think that also then requires developing a culture - so "sheep" following the new status quo - of a protocol to help people develop their self-awareness - to gain and maintain their health, which in part is to heal past trauma that closed off their heart and mind, blocking their critical thinking and empathy development.
DanBC 6y ago
Why not install INN and then slrn or similar and do it via Usenet? The free.* hierarchicy is available.
- throwaw4ybio 6y ago
  Would love to see a legit reply to this point. Usenet is there.
  - 3np 6y ago
    It's kind of in the article even if not mentioned explicitly: Usenet is not censorship-resistant or anonymous in the same way
  - threeseed 6y ago
    Because free speech like the author wants = objectionable content. Which server providers will be hosting that Usenet newsgroups and be willing to be legal responsible for said content ?
    - DanBC 6y ago
      You can host it yourself. INN is a server. slrn is one client, but there are lots. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterNetNews https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterNetNews
- anon20190221 6y ago
  Not secure enough? People operating the servers see everything you are doing, this is no-no for whistleblowers.
  - DanBC 6y ago
    You operate your own servers You use your own encryption
    - anon20190221 6y ago
cemerick 6y ago
Number one with 27 points in 20 minutes for yet another chan board (named...pepe ) with a risible rationale? News for hackers, indeed.
- almost_usual 6y ago
  I didn’t know what R5N was until I read this. Ignoring technology because you don’t like the context seems short sighted.
  - cemerick 6y ago
    Yes, quality nuggets can be found even among refuse, but my point was not to discount that potential. Thanks to the length of the manifesto/thought experiment, at least the first half-hours' worth of upvotes were provided because of the absurd premise/worldview, not in spite of it. If that seems fine to you (speaking royally here), you're in the right place.
    - dang 6y ago
      It takes time for the immune system to kick in. In this case it did pretty quickly.
- the_only_law 6y ago
  Meh, at least it goes into some technical details. More than I can say for some of the crap that reaches the front page.
  - goldcd 6y ago
    I was out, when it didn't use Blockchain
    - anon20190221 6y ago
      It kinda does: https://1b677b8f8bb20100.github.io/introduction/#why-is-pepe-not-built-on-top-of-a-blockchain https://1b677b8f8bb20100.github.io/introduction/#why-is-pepe...
endisneigh 6y ago
I'm surprised no one has made a truly decentralized site using webtorrent or ipfs, such that the more people use it, the harder it is to take down. I suppose databases would be hard to implement with both, but you could just save everything as updating flat files and the database could be a progressive enhancement. seems like an interesting technical problem to solve. if you're willing to trade off speed for resilience it seems possible with today's technology with very little modification.
- anon20190221 6y ago
  This project is pretty much what you are describing, only more secure and tailored for a pretty much single use case.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
TeaDude 6y ago
This is cool and all but I really think you should have at least something for us to dick around with before you announce something big like this. Still, I'll be keeping tabs on development. This seems like it could be /fun/.
louwrentius 6y ago
> You see, freedom of speech and expression must be absolute. No, that is not true. It was never true. Nothing is absolute. But maybe you are OK if I publicly put a bounty on your life. The Pepe stuff just reeks like this is going to become yet another toxic cesspool of undesirable content if not outright illegal smut. We don’t need another platform where people can be openly racist. Where people can say hideous things and call for hatred and violence.
ojnabieoot 6y ago
You can pretend to care about North Korean censorship all you want, but if you name your platform “Pepe,” positively cite 4chan as an influence, and take the time to criticize “cancel culture SJWs” then it’s quite clear what your intentions and motivations are, and who your audience is: you want to create a space run by and for racist pieces of garbage. You don’t actually care about free speech at all, and neither does anyone who is pretending that this platform will provide a public good.
- dkjaudyeqooe 6y ago
  "Frustrated with Parler deplatforming" was kind of a giveaway.
  - encom 6y ago
    Yea, if OP opposes cancel culture, he must be a nazi. There's no other conclusion.
    - ojnabieoot 6y ago
      To be clear I didn’t say he was a Nazi, merely that he was a racist piece of garbage.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - encom 6y ago
        You should move to North Korea. It seems like a place more aligned with your beliefs.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
      - onelovetwo 6y ago
        Where did race ever come into this, is that just something people scream out nowadays?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
- nerdponx 6y ago
  The whole point of the platform is to be a place that is not dependent on being in the good graces of any single private company and/or government for its existence. I'm floored at how many commenters here are expressing their doubts about this project because the author clearly has a distasteful political affiliation. Yes, it being named after Pepe (and use of dogwhistle terms like "SJW") is a clear sign that the author is a person who I would probably be thrilled to see get a kick in the teeth. But I'm really quite disappointed in the overtly authoritarian attitude being expressed here. Somehow we're all champions of Tor and Bitcoin although they clearly can be (and are) used to serve the needs of drug cartels, sex traffickers, terrorists (other than the ones too stupid to plan their insurrection on Parler), et alia. But as soon as someone happens to associate the thing with the alt-right, we are all anti-freedom?
boopmaster 6y ago
When the message board begins to organize an effort to occupy the Whitehouse by force, to raise the flags of Trumpistan, therefore deleting all freedom of speech and the almighty dollar in favor of trumpcoin, it might be valid to shut em down.
nerdponx 6y ago
Can anyone comment on the actual technical merit of this project? This seems like a kind of hybrid among other various distributed networks out there, like IPFS, Tor, Freenet, GNUnet, Zeronet, et alia. As for the political side... just remember that amoral selfish people with reprehensible values are entitled to the same rights as the rest of us, and we should be applauding their desire to build tools that benefit everyone.
- oehpr 6y ago
  I agree with the sentiment that morally bankrupt people are people too. The problem is that these people end up flooding and drowning out open access platforms and create a toxic environment for everyone but them. And I don't believe it's impossible to have a platform that these people can be on without them subsequently destroying the platform. I've personally got a design for a network I think that can accomplish these objectives. I'm sure there are many strategies that can work. But if a new social network makes a pitch and it doesn't go way out of its way to say how they're going to contain the massive influx of toxic runoff from the mainline social networks, then I can assume that if I join, that will be the environment. I can assume the only people on that board are the people too extreme for 4chan. I'll pass.
gamache 6y ago
"Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am soliciting donations in BTC, ETH, and XMR." Anyone interested in "building a service no one can silence" ought to start with mesh radio protocols and solar power. Glad this asshole didn't.
threeseed 6y ago
Everyone says this. Until they have to deal with the realities of what true free speech means: child pornography, child exploitation, rape, ultra violence, terrorism, organised crime, drug dealing, doxxing innocent people etc. My Reddit account is 13 years old so I've seen personally seen communities of all of the above grow and flourish and the true levels of depravity that humans can reach. Ultimately it got to the point where Reddit simply couldn't take it. But hey good luck. I do love the fact that you're using Github to host this.
- bilbo0s 6y ago
  child pornography, child exploitation, rape, ultra violence Sometimes people get into a position where they have to defend the indefensible, and in the process end up rhetorically fighting a rear-guard action against the truth. There was the question of a particularly horrific death video of a 7 year old girl being disemboweled (among other things) a while back. Instead of simply conceding that there is some filth that has no place in civilized societies, these absolutists stubbornly stuck to their talking points. This makes all of us look bad. People start looking at all free speech advocates as being this same level of unreasonable. I always try go out of my way to separate my ideas of privacy protection, anti-surveillance, and free speech from those of these absolutists. I do not believe little girls should be able to be publicly raped and disemboweled, even virtually and digitally created, simply because there exists a market of sickos for it. But I do believe that unpopular opinions should be countenanced and the right to express unpopular opinions should be supported.
  - goldcd 6y ago
    It's a reasonable point, but if I can be a little bit "whataboutist" If you're against entirely fictional depictions of child abuse, then how do you feel about other fictional depictions of a crime? (That's a lot of films and books to ban). Or pictures of actual real crimes? Would you remove photos of Auschwitz from text books? Or from a far right meme? Not saying I have any better answers, just I get slightly niggles when others think they've solved the issue, by everybody else agreeing with them.
- almost_usual 6y ago
happytoexplain 6y ago
The motivation of the author is pretty plainly a desire to express antagonistic mockery and petty hatred. Freedom of speech is a wildly larger context that sounds much nicer.
zamadatix 6y ago
How does it plan on dealing with spam/bots? In a system where nobody has a verified identity, nothing can be removed without destroying most of the system, and consensus decides what's visible the real users seem to be at quite the disadvantage. Spam/bots are a common, tough, problem for existing imageboards that can exert central control. I don't think light/dark comes close to solving this type of issue, it assumes the majority of interactions are benevolent.
- anon20190221 6y ago
  HashCash whose difficulty is chosen collectively based on the load. Since threads/boards are represented with Merkle-CRDTs, there's eventual consistency, so participants can reach some sort of consensus based on the message rate. This limits the posting rate and gives some time for moderation. Threads eventually die off, so it's not a big problem there's shadowed spam in them. And regarding boards, people will simply not participate in making swarms around spammy threads, so it shouldn't be a big deal.
3np 6y ago
dang: this seems incorrectly flagged.
- drusepth 6y ago
  Looks like all of OP's comments have also been flagged, ironically.
  - FreshFries 6y ago
    Maybe since OP's account has exactly done 1 thing: post this link and defends / explains what the "developer of the tool" does, thinks and means, but in the third person.
encom 6y ago
How sadly unsurprising that HN hates free speech. This just proves that we need platforms free of Silicon Valley influence.
- drusepth 6y ago
  Yeah, I wouldn't use this service but I thought the write-up was well-written. I was surprised to see OP flagged until I saw the kind of comments people were leaving on it.
aninuth 6y ago
This is an interesting project by all means, but I'm curious as to what your goal/vision for this project is. The reason that most online forum-esque services involve some sort of moderation isn't because they give in to the so-called "woke SJW Twitter mob", it's because they want to expand their user bases - a platform cannot host large amounts of sexist content and attract women, it cannot stop taking action against content that is racist and expect a multicultural user base, and so forth. As for an intial starting point, it makes sense that you are looking to capture users that have been kicked off places like Reddit, FB, or can't participate on Parler any longer and I'm sure you will have success within that target group if you are able to get this off the ground. However, I'm not sure where you're going to get new users from after that - and without a more diverse user base, you are not only limiting the spread of ideas from your platform to elsewhere but are also creating an echo chamber where people who self-select for "my views are not tolerable in the mainstream" are the only ones who are talking. This problem will get worse over time, and make it even harder to attract new users. Like you say in your blog post, a major source of frustration with existing technology is that "They prefer purity to practicality". It seems an awful lot like you are trying to do the same thing here, and while this project will certainly be entertaining, I'm not sure how viable this will end up being - I'm having a hard time seeing this as anything other than another Voat/Ruqqus.
- 3np 6y ago
  In the post, they mention that each board will be moderated (filtered) by the creator, and the same goes for thread creators. Effectively it comes down to content creation and filters that can live on the client-side. Any decentralized unauthenticated or federated social network faces the same issues around reputation, moderation and sybil attacks. Matrix, for example, has the same. I imagine over time we'll get a growing economy of curation markets - users choose their own maintainers for allow/deny-lists and content discovery, effectively allowing them to use these networks in a way that is meaningful to them. Some of these mechanisms are explored quite heavily by people in the Ethereum space - not necessarily with social networks in mind, but I think these kinds of mechanisms are going to play a more important role in our world in the coming decades (lest we go deeper into centralized control)
bobjordan 6y ago
The fact that this was flagged and taken from the front page is par for the course, so sick of authoritarian technocrats.
ccortes 6y ago
Ok so according to this you can't delete anything. What happens then if I want to delete something I posted previously? Is it free speech if I want to retract something posted by myself but I'm not able to do so? Is it really free speech if a comment can't be altered/deleted by the owner of it?
- giveexamples 6y ago
  I guess as long as profiles are talking heads it's fine since there's little consequence. If you want to post offensive material to some people/governments you need to work hard to stay anonymous, like the reporter example where they recommend using a public eg library place to connect.
- waterhouse 6y ago
  > according to this you can't delete anything. This is a property of the internet and information in general. If data was served to clients at some point, then it's possible for the clients to have saved a copy (if nothing else then by taking a picture of the screen). Even if it happens that no one saved a copy, it's not generally possible to be sure of that. Any "deletion" feature would therefore be unreliable at best. Being able to "edit" posts, to submit a new version of a post and have clients by convention normally show the newest version, sounds like a decent feature. (The older versions would, of course, be available too.)
fiestaman 6y ago
Why is this flagged?
the_only_law 6y ago
Wonder if these sort of “free speech” platforms would be welcoming of intelligent discussions from the viewpoints of things like Marxism, left-anarchists, egoists, etc.
- anon20190221 6y ago
  Why not? At least here, free speech means free speech, not "I don't like existing platforms because I cannot silence people I don't like, I'm building a new one" type of "free speech".
NoImmatureAdHom 6y ago
Parler may be a shithole and this person could be a racist, but this is exactly the kind of thing we need. We may feel secure in our ability to silence people we find odious, but it's only a matter of time until the system evolves to silence us for one reason or another. In particular, I think the magic sauce Pepe has is every user having his / her own moderation filter. The bitcoin donation address is here: bc1qs9pksy354fjksldtm0f566lmqrafzqurp8tfm8 Ethereum: 0x7414938a215ff3a9D24073Fcb17750D0CE3E7bDC Monero: 48wc7RZfQFo2VUydaoA6PM42GHmy6GKYJ2zXGmRic6J4hdTWw5Gik4NfiS6KjT9ZpPddNSb2W96ixQ59KXakYGMw9Z3D1Yk
- anon20190221 6y ago
  If you do not feel like donating, consider showing the referenced blog post to your friends who might be interested in this project. Donations will fuel the development, but the author is going to work on it no matter what.
AnonC 6y ago
I’m more interested in substantive comments, including thoughtful criticisms, about such a platform and am appreciative of those in this thread. Can we have more of that instead of knee jerk flagging, please? Thank you. Edit: I believe that free speech being absolute is problematic, but I also see issues with the changing contours of what’s allowed or forbidden in the “not absolute” classification that’s commonly used.
GeoffreyPlitt 6y ago
Only election-truthers and violence peddlers get scared when Twitter deplatforms election-truthers and violence peddlers. As far as I can tell, serious conservatives haven't been touched. Watch as Trump supporters use every logical fallacy in the book to avoid this fact.
- encom 6y ago
  >serious conservatives haven't been touched Are you familiar with former american president Donald J. Trump? EDIT: And now I'm banned from posting. Thanks HN. Sorry I don't agree with your hive mind.
  - sodality2 6y ago
    >Only election-truthers and violence peddlers Did you read the parent comment?
axiosgunnar 6y ago
What would happen if one were to publish a post with the author's full name and home address on such a service?
jimmysjohn279 6y ago
Wallstreetbets would undoubtedly also be a user here. They were worried about the discord channel being taken down, their reddit moderators being taken over, etc. Then the SEC started investigating. Strong anonymity would be of value to the retail trader mobs. Online mobs are not going away. They will get stronger.
zerez 6y ago
https://github.com/majestrate/bitchan https://github.com/majestrate/bitchan This seems already close enough to what the author is proposing. Even the language choice is the same. Your project will still require the users to download a 3rd party software to run it, which I believe to be the main problem with the current approaches. Therefore I don't see anything new this is bringing to the table. It's no different than downloading and running the imageboard above or downloading IPFS/ZeroNet and using one of the imageboards there.
- anon20190221 6y ago
  Yes, somewhat similar. Thanks for the link. The major difference here is that Pepe runs on a mix network similar to I2P, this helps hide your identity whereas anyone can see what you are doing with plain Bitcoin. To answer the question in your comment: yes, you can install and configure I2P, you can install iMule on top of it to exchange files and some distributed forum to post on. But the usability of all that is really low even for a pro-user. The performance is also not great because those systems were not designed to be used with each other from scratch.
  - giveexamples 6y ago
    I wonder if it's possible to implement this via WebRTC and javascript? This would make it compatible with everyone with a browser, without need to develop an application for every platform. One stumbling block would be addressability without TURN.

114 points by anon20190221 6y ago

Technical question: Is it possible to build a service/platform that cannot be silenced? I was thinking about Starlink and how if Musk wanted to they could make it resistant to censorship, but theoretically speaking, it would still be possible in the extreme to bring that platform down. So that raised the question in my mind: What would it take to make a platform bullet proof from censorship?

anon20190221 6y ago
Well, some government can decide to outlaw cryptography, jam radio (this includes Starlink, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth etc.), but you can still use something like Sneakernet. So I'd argue it's possible, but one need to choose their friends very carefully.

makeworld 6y ago

Interesting. Have you heard of Aether though? It seems a lot simpler, but achieving the same result. It's a flood network, I believe. https://getaether.net/ https://getaether.net/

TeaDude 6y ago
Hmm. This seems like an interesting protocol. Not a big fan of the whole mod election approach though. Seems like it might just turn into a constant scramble for power. Still, the front page does seem to imply mods can only sorta block content so it might not be too bad. Thank you for suggesting this.
anon20190221 6y ago
Looks interesting. Unfortunately, flooding does not scale, its cost is O(n²) where n is the number of participants. The saddest part is that if they were to switch to a less bandwidth-crippling scheme (such as GossipSub), that would destroy the whole purpose because malicious agents can start soliciting messages, and given there is no premix layer on top, time to reveal your identity is going to start approaching zero.
- thu2111 6y ago
  That scaling argument assumes everyone pays the global network cost per node, which isn't true. Gossip scales because the cost to each participant is O(connections to my node), not O(connections in the whole network), and it's the per-participant cost that gets paid.

kragen 6y ago

Empty repo.

anon20190221 6y ago
The referenced blog post explains why. The author has just started.
- kragen 6y ago
  Without code, "I am building a service no one can silence" is an empty boast. Moreover, it's an empty boast that could stimulate opposition, like running toward a heavily armed border checkpoint screaming "I have a gun!". So it's best seen as trolling.
johntash 6y ago
Empty repo, except for the readme with donation links.

gchamonlive 6y ago

In a tolerant society, should we tolerate intolerance? I am genuinely interested to hear your thoughts.

chrissnell 6y ago
We should tolerate all speech. That doesn't mean you can't scream and call it hate speech, but do so from your own platform.
- cmeacham98 6y ago
  What about libel/slander? What about child pornography? What about doxxing? Surely you agree we have to draw the line _somewhere_, even if you disagree with where we currently draw it?
  - falcolas 6y ago
    > What about child pornography? It's amusing how frequently this comes up. If someone distributes child pornography, arrest them using the existing laws of the land. "But what if it spreads from there?" I hear someone saying. Well, they're still posting illegal content, so arrest them too. It's silly to assume that the freedom of speech implies some kind of inherent free pass from consequences of your speech.
    - danaris 6y ago
      I think what you're missing in this is that the only reason that stands is because images of child pornography, which would otherwise be considered protected speech just like any other image, have been declared to be illegal. It's not that "there are laws against child pornography, which are completely separate from the debate about free speech." Laws against the production of (actual) child pornography are irrelevant to the debate about free speech. Laws against its distribution are absolutely relevant, because "distribution of child pornography" is just a kind of speech. (To be clear, I oppose free-speech maximalism in general, and have no trouble with the idea of laws criminalizing the distribution of child pornography.)

arkitaip 6y ago

"You see, freedom of speech and expression must be absolute." This is a very ignorant take on freedom of speech and a terrible foundation for your project.

threevox 6y ago
"Ignorant" == you can't be bothered to come up with a genuine refutation
- tclancy 6y ago
  Watch: this is some white dude worrying that white dudes might be silenced. Show me all the money trying to make marginalized voices heard and then you cannot fuck off into the multiverse like whichever anime show you Stan but don’t respect.
  - LocalH 6y ago
    Stop equating strong freedom-of-speech ideals with racism. Nobody should be silenced unless they are directly inciting violence. Remember, any exceptions can be twisted around as social norms change.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - krapp 6y ago
      >Nobody should be silenced unless they are directly inciting violence. >Remember, any exceptions can be twisted around as social norms change. If no exceptions to free speech can be allowed because they could possibly be twisted, then neither can the exception for directly inciting violence. Absolute means absolute.
- AgentOrange1234 6y ago
  How about: drumming up hatred and demonizing people has a long history of terrible consequences, e.g., rwanda, nazi germany, kkk, ...

tovej 6y ago

"You see, freedom of speech and expression must be absolute." That's pretty extreme. First, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence of speech. And second, freedom of speech only applies to public forums. Why would a private enterprise need to put up with someone spreading vitriol and fake news? Let's say I own a mall, and you rent a store in that mall. You suddenly decide that you are going to start selling Nazi merch and incite people to riot in my mall. Why am I a "cancel culture SJW" if I kick you out of my mall?

jimbob45 6y ago
What if you exclusively kick all blacks out of your mall? Under your rules, that should be indiscriminately allowed.
- tovej 6y ago
  My rules (society's rules) are entirely orthogonal to the issue of discrimination against groups of people. If individuals do not follow the rules, they should be punished, that's fine. If you apply the rules differently depending on what group a person belongs to, that's not ok. ... but that has nothing to do with my comment (I can't believe I have to explain this).
- Arainach 6y ago
  Discrimination based on what someone is is wrong and illegal. That's why we have protected classes for race, gender, sexuality, age, and so on. Discrimination based on people's words and actions is how society functions. It's perfectly legal. This isn't even about politics. If you think people refusing to do business with white supremacists, insurrectionists, and racists is discriminating against a political party, that says a lot about that political party. No one's getting deplatformed for talking about deregulation or free trade.
barbacoa 6y ago
People do have free speech rights at private owned malls. Not sure if that would apply to stores but courts have ruled it does apply to people at malls (and other public areas that are privately owned). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v._Robins https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pruneyard_Shopping_Center_v....

jimbob45 6y ago

> There is a huge misunderstanding, Pepe the Frog has always been a symbol of resistance in underground culture, it was journalists who decided it was evil without understanding a damn thing. It’s not a symbol of resistance. It’s a glum-looking frog. That’s it. Also this forum doesn’t seem to allow for identifying oneself which precludes it from competing with Parler/Twitter. At best, it can compete with 4ch/8kun but those serve their (admittedly limited) purpose quite well with few complaints these days.

belimawr 6y ago
First time hearing Pepe as a symbol of resistance. Saw it first as "Feels good man" before it turned into edgy alt-right symbol.
- nerdponx 6y ago
  4chan was always kind of the "home" of Pepe memes, so it was kind of natural that the racists, incels, and other "alt-right" denizens of 4chan made (and still make) extensive use of Pepe and consider it "their own" to some extent. But the whole thing about specifically making Pepe into an alt-right symbol was just some shit they stirred up to "troll" the media. It worked, and the stigma stuck. A lot of Pepe memes also ended up becoming Twitch emotes through BetterTwitchTV and FrankerFaceZ. And a lot of those emotes found their way into Discord chatrooms. In Discord, you can usually tell whether someone is an alt-right person or not by what Pepe emotes they use.

ThomW 6y ago

Parler is a shit hole, and at this point I’m not sure we need another social network anything. The major ones do a lousy job of policing fake news and misinformation, and from your tone it sounds like you support that garbage. I’m pretty sure giving every moron on earth a globally-accessible soapbox is about the stupidest idea humankind has ever had.

drukenemo 6y ago
The first problem it pops-out when I read your comment is that you are sure your opinions represent the good and opinions that go against yours are objectively the evil. Censoring what is not what you want to express is thus virtuous. Imagine for a moment that this platform would be against calling for “censoring morons” and thus your comment banned.
- ThomW 6y ago
  If the same folks who believe that building a bulletproof Parler is a good idea think I'm a moron, I think I'm in a pretty good position morally.
tanseydavid 6y ago
These exact same things were said about the printing-press when it was the epitome of new, high-technology.
- mlindner 6y ago
  Before the printing press came out, literally no one had a voice. It was simply too expensive. Printing press actually allowed some people to have a voice, but you still needed money to fund it. Going back to an era where you need money to have a voice wouldn't be a bad idea. A good start would be to outlaw any social network from also running an ad network, for-pay social networks only. Then I'd know only people who actually cared would be saying things.
bilbo0s 6y ago
Who was the guy who said, "There's no such thing as a 'stupid' idea, only great ideas that go horribly wrong." It's all about the context, and having the requisite creativity to see the drawbacks on the horizon. I think social media and surveillance marketing are good examples of what he was probably talking about. (Actually, IIRC, the quote was in relation to dating strippers, but you get the idea.)

loceng 6y ago

Will it prevent blocking others from replying to counter irrational, unreasonable thinking - or say, if someone's promoting violence - can others be able to comment to try to quell, calm the anger - or will individuals be able to censor whomever they like which is arguably as bad as deplatforming?

drusepth 6y ago
>What is fundamentally different with Pepe is moderation. Instead of relying on a centralized entity with a banhammer, each board and thread owner may anonymously moderate their spaces on their own. However, nothing can actually be deleted, it can only be shadowed, and each user decides whether they want to see the light or the full version of the page at any moment in time. People can still reply to shadowed posts inside their own shadowed posts, so no one cannot silence anyone, only maintain order on the light side.
- hexadec 6y ago
  This begs the question, which is the default: light or full. You cannot claim to support freedom of speech and have this capacity in my opinion. It is implicitly saying some voices are less valid. It is an interesting project technically, but I do not think it will replace the *chan model for edgy people to be edgy on the internet. If your opinions are so extreme that you feel that you must be anonymous and free from repercussions, they may be terrible opinions in the eyes of society.
  - loceng 6y ago
    I think the issue, if there ever becomes a protocol allowing for full freedom of speech, is that of time-resource management: if you know a certain user just isn't responsive or open to listening to reason - closed heart, closed mind - blind in rage like the boar demons in Princess Mononoke. I believe there needs to be a system to tag such individuals and then some sort of intervention in-person - we're not going to work through people's anger and build trust, relationship, with them online. I think that also then requires developing a culture - so "sheep" following the new status quo - of a protocol to help people develop their self-awareness - to gain and maintain their health, which in part is to heal past trauma that closed off their heart and mind, blocking their critical thinking and empathy development.

DanBC 6y ago

Why not install INN and then slrn or similar and do it via Usenet? The free.* hierarchicy is available.

throwaw4ybio 6y ago
Would love to see a legit reply to this point. Usenet is there.
- 3np 6y ago
  It's kind of in the article even if not mentioned explicitly: Usenet is not censorship-resistant or anonymous in the same way
- threeseed 6y ago
  Because free speech like the author wants = objectionable content. Which server providers will be hosting that Usenet newsgroups and be willing to be legal responsible for said content ?
  - DanBC 6y ago
    You can host it yourself. INN is a server. slrn is one client, but there are lots. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterNetNews https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterNetNews
anon20190221 6y ago
Not secure enough? People operating the servers see everything you are doing, this is no-no for whistleblowers.
- DanBC 6y ago
  You operate your own servers You use your own encryption
  - anon20190221 6y ago

cemerick 6y ago

Number one with 27 points in 20 minutes for yet another chan board (named...pepe ) with a risible rationale? News for hackers, indeed.

almost_usual 6y ago
I didn’t know what R5N was until I read this. Ignoring technology because you don’t like the context seems short sighted.
- cemerick 6y ago
  Yes, quality nuggets can be found even among refuse, but my point was not to discount that potential. Thanks to the length of the manifesto/thought experiment, at least the first half-hours' worth of upvotes were provided because of the absurd premise/worldview, not in spite of it. If that seems fine to you (speaking royally here), you're in the right place.
  - dang 6y ago
    It takes time for the immune system to kick in. In this case it did pretty quickly.
the_only_law 6y ago
Meh, at least it goes into some technical details. More than I can say for some of the crap that reaches the front page.
- goldcd 6y ago
  I was out, when it didn't use Blockchain
  - anon20190221 6y ago
    It kinda does: https://1b677b8f8bb20100.github.io/introduction/#why-is-pepe-not-built-on-top-of-a-blockchain https://1b677b8f8bb20100.github.io/introduction/#why-is-pepe...

endisneigh 6y ago

I'm surprised no one has made a truly decentralized site using webtorrent or ipfs, such that the more people use it, the harder it is to take down. I suppose databases would be hard to implement with both, but you could just save everything as updating flat files and the database could be a progressive enhancement. seems like an interesting technical problem to solve. if you're willing to trade off speed for resilience it seems possible with today's technology with very little modification.

anon20190221 6y ago
This project is pretty much what you are describing, only more secure and tailored for a pretty much single use case.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

TeaDude 6y ago

This is cool and all but I really think you should have at least something for us to dick around with before you announce something big like this. Still, I'll be keeping tabs on development. This seems like it could be /fun/.

louwrentius 6y ago

> You see, freedom of speech and expression must be absolute. No, that is not true. It was never true. Nothing is absolute. But maybe you are OK if I publicly put a bounty on your life. The Pepe stuff just reeks like this is going to become yet another toxic cesspool of undesirable content if not outright illegal smut. We don’t need another platform where people can be openly racist. Where people can say hideous things and call for hatred and violence.

ojnabieoot 6y ago

You can pretend to care about North Korean censorship all you want, but if you name your platform “Pepe,” positively cite 4chan as an influence, and take the time to criticize “cancel culture SJWs” then it’s quite clear what your intentions and motivations are, and who your audience is: you want to create a space run by and for racist pieces of garbage. You don’t actually care about free speech at all, and neither does anyone who is pretending that this platform will provide a public good.

dkjaudyeqooe 6y ago
"Frustrated with Parler deplatforming" was kind of a giveaway.
- encom 6y ago
  Yea, if OP opposes cancel culture, he must be a nazi. There's no other conclusion.
  - ojnabieoot 6y ago
    To be clear I didn’t say he was a Nazi, merely that he was a racist piece of garbage.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - encom 6y ago
      You should move to North Korea. It seems like a place more aligned with your beliefs.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - onelovetwo 6y ago
      Where did race ever come into this, is that just something people scream out nowadays?

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

nerdponx 6y ago
The whole point of the platform is to be a place that is not dependent on being in the good graces of any single private company and/or government for its existence. I'm floored at how many commenters here are expressing their doubts about this project because the author clearly has a distasteful political affiliation. Yes, it being named after Pepe (and use of dogwhistle terms like "SJW") is a clear sign that the author is a person who I would probably be thrilled to see get a kick in the teeth. But I'm really quite disappointed in the overtly authoritarian attitude being expressed here. Somehow we're all champions of Tor and Bitcoin although they clearly can be (and are) used to serve the needs of drug cartels, sex traffickers, terrorists (other than the ones too stupid to plan their insurrection on Parler), et alia. But as soon as someone happens to associate the thing with the alt-right, we are all anti-freedom?

boopmaster 6y ago

When the message board begins to organize an effort to occupy the Whitehouse by force, to raise the flags of Trumpistan, therefore deleting all freedom of speech and the almighty dollar in favor of trumpcoin, it might be valid to shut em down.

nerdponx 6y ago

Can anyone comment on the actual technical merit of this project? This seems like a kind of hybrid among other various distributed networks out there, like IPFS, Tor, Freenet, GNUnet, Zeronet, et alia. As for the political side... just remember that amoral selfish people with reprehensible values are entitled to the same rights as the rest of us, and we should be applauding their desire to build tools that benefit everyone.

oehpr 6y ago
I agree with the sentiment that morally bankrupt people are people too. The problem is that these people end up flooding and drowning out open access platforms and create a toxic environment for everyone but them. And I don't believe it's impossible to have a platform that these people can be on without them subsequently destroying the platform. I've personally got a design for a network I think that can accomplish these objectives. I'm sure there are many strategies that can work. But if a new social network makes a pitch and it doesn't go way out of its way to say how they're going to contain the massive influx of toxic runoff from the mainline social networks, then I can assume that if I join, that will be the environment. I can assume the only people on that board are the people too extreme for 4chan. I'll pass.

gamache 6y ago

"Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am soliciting donations in BTC, ETH, and XMR." Anyone interested in "building a service no one can silence" ought to start with mesh radio protocols and solar power. Glad this asshole didn't.

threeseed 6y ago

Everyone says this. Until they have to deal with the realities of what true free speech means: child pornography, child exploitation, rape, ultra violence, terrorism, organised crime, drug dealing, doxxing innocent people etc. My Reddit account is 13 years old so I've seen personally seen communities of all of the above grow and flourish and the true levels of depravity that humans can reach. Ultimately it got to the point where Reddit simply couldn't take it. But hey good luck. I do love the fact that you're using Github to host this.

bilbo0s 6y ago
child pornography, child exploitation, rape, ultra violence Sometimes people get into a position where they have to defend the indefensible, and in the process end up rhetorically fighting a rear-guard action against the truth. There was the question of a particularly horrific death video of a 7 year old girl being disemboweled (among other things) a while back. Instead of simply conceding that there is some filth that has no place in civilized societies, these absolutists stubbornly stuck to their talking points. This makes all of us look bad. People start looking at all free speech advocates as being this same level of unreasonable. I always try go out of my way to separate my ideas of privacy protection, anti-surveillance, and free speech from those of these absolutists. I do not believe little girls should be able to be publicly raped and disemboweled, even virtually and digitally created, simply because there exists a market of sickos for it. But I do believe that unpopular opinions should be countenanced and the right to express unpopular opinions should be supported.
- goldcd 6y ago
  It's a reasonable point, but if I can be a little bit "whataboutist" If you're against entirely fictional depictions of child abuse, then how do you feel about other fictional depictions of a crime? (That's a lot of films and books to ban). Or pictures of actual real crimes? Would you remove photos of Auschwitz from text books? Or from a far right meme? Not saying I have any better answers, just I get slightly niggles when others think they've solved the issue, by everybody else agreeing with them.
almost_usual 6y ago

happytoexplain 6y ago

The motivation of the author is pretty plainly a desire to express antagonistic mockery and petty hatred. Freedom of speech is a wildly larger context that sounds much nicer.

zamadatix 6y ago

How does it plan on dealing with spam/bots? In a system where nobody has a verified identity, nothing can be removed without destroying most of the system, and consensus decides what's visible the real users seem to be at quite the disadvantage. Spam/bots are a common, tough, problem for existing imageboards that can exert central control. I don't think light/dark comes close to solving this type of issue, it assumes the majority of interactions are benevolent.

anon20190221 6y ago
HashCash whose difficulty is chosen collectively based on the load. Since threads/boards are represented with Merkle-CRDTs, there's eventual consistency, so participants can reach some sort of consensus based on the message rate. This limits the posting rate and gives some time for moderation. Threads eventually die off, so it's not a big problem there's shadowed spam in them. And regarding boards, people will simply not participate in making swarms around spammy threads, so it shouldn't be a big deal.

3np 6y ago

dang: this seems incorrectly flagged.

drusepth 6y ago
Looks like all of OP's comments have also been flagged, ironically.
- FreshFries 6y ago
  Maybe since OP's account has exactly done 1 thing: post this link and defends / explains what the "developer of the tool" does, thinks and means, but in the third person.

encom 6y ago

How sadly unsurprising that HN hates free speech. This just proves that we need platforms free of Silicon Valley influence.

drusepth 6y ago
Yeah, I wouldn't use this service but I thought the write-up was well-written. I was surprised to see OP flagged until I saw the kind of comments people were leaving on it.

aninuth 6y ago

This is an interesting project by all means, but I'm curious as to what your goal/vision for this project is. The reason that most online forum-esque services involve some sort of moderation isn't because they give in to the so-called "woke SJW Twitter mob", it's because they want to expand their user bases - a platform cannot host large amounts of sexist content and attract women, it cannot stop taking action against content that is racist and expect a multicultural user base, and so forth. As for an intial starting point, it makes sense that you are looking to capture users that have been kicked off places like Reddit, FB, or can't participate on Parler any longer and I'm sure you will have success within that target group if you are able to get this off the ground. However, I'm not sure where you're going to get new users from after that - and without a more diverse user base, you are not only limiting the spread of ideas from your platform to elsewhere but are also creating an echo chamber where people who self-select for "my views are not tolerable in the mainstream" are the only ones who are talking. This problem will get worse over time, and make it even harder to attract new users. Like you say in your blog post, a major source of frustration with existing technology is that "They prefer purity to practicality". It seems an awful lot like you are trying to do the same thing here, and while this project will certainly be entertaining, I'm not sure how viable this will end up being - I'm having a hard time seeing this as anything other than another Voat/Ruqqus.

3np 6y ago
In the post, they mention that each board will be moderated (filtered) by the creator, and the same goes for thread creators. Effectively it comes down to content creation and filters that can live on the client-side. Any decentralized unauthenticated or federated social network faces the same issues around reputation, moderation and sybil attacks. Matrix, for example, has the same. I imagine over time we'll get a growing economy of curation markets - users choose their own maintainers for allow/deny-lists and content discovery, effectively allowing them to use these networks in a way that is meaningful to them. Some of these mechanisms are explored quite heavily by people in the Ethereum space - not necessarily with social networks in mind, but I think these kinds of mechanisms are going to play a more important role in our world in the coming decades (lest we go deeper into centralized control)

bobjordan 6y ago

The fact that this was flagged and taken from the front page is par for the course, so sick of authoritarian technocrats.

ccortes 6y ago

Ok so according to this you can't delete anything. What happens then if I want to delete something I posted previously? Is it free speech if I want to retract something posted by myself but I'm not able to do so? Is it really free speech if a comment can't be altered/deleted by the owner of it?

giveexamples 6y ago
I guess as long as profiles are talking heads it's fine since there's little consequence. If you want to post offensive material to some people/governments you need to work hard to stay anonymous, like the reporter example where they recommend using a public eg library place to connect.
waterhouse 6y ago
> according to this you can't delete anything. This is a property of the internet and information in general. If data was served to clients at some point, then it's possible for the clients to have saved a copy (if nothing else then by taking a picture of the screen). Even if it happens that no one saved a copy, it's not generally possible to be sure of that. Any "deletion" feature would therefore be unreliable at best. Being able to "edit" posts, to submit a new version of a post and have clients by convention normally show the newest version, sounds like a decent feature. (The older versions would, of course, be available too.)

fiestaman 6y ago

Why is this flagged?

the_only_law 6y ago

Wonder if these sort of “free speech” platforms would be welcoming of intelligent discussions from the viewpoints of things like Marxism, left-anarchists, egoists, etc.

anon20190221 6y ago
Why not? At least here, free speech means free speech, not "I don't like existing platforms because I cannot silence people I don't like, I'm building a new one" type of "free speech".

NoImmatureAdHom 6y ago

Parler may be a shithole and this person could be a racist, but this is exactly the kind of thing we need. We may feel secure in our ability to silence people we find odious, but it's only a matter of time until the system evolves to silence us for one reason or another. In particular, I think the magic sauce Pepe has is every user having his / her own moderation filter. The bitcoin donation address is here: bc1qs9pksy354fjksldtm0f566lmqrafzqurp8tfm8 Ethereum: 0x7414938a215ff3a9D24073Fcb17750D0CE3E7bDC Monero: 48wc7RZfQFo2VUydaoA6PM42GHmy6GKYJ2zXGmRic6J4hdTWw5Gik4NfiS6KjT9ZpPddNSb2W96ixQ59KXakYGMw9Z3D1Yk

anon20190221 6y ago
If you do not feel like donating, consider showing the referenced blog post to your friends who might be interested in this project. Donations will fuel the development, but the author is going to work on it no matter what.

AnonC 6y ago

I’m more interested in substantive comments, including thoughtful criticisms, about such a platform and am appreciative of those in this thread. Can we have more of that instead of knee jerk flagging, please? Thank you. Edit: I believe that free speech being absolute is problematic, but I also see issues with the changing contours of what’s allowed or forbidden in the “not absolute” classification that’s commonly used.

GeoffreyPlitt 6y ago

Only election-truthers and violence peddlers get scared when Twitter deplatforms election-truthers and violence peddlers. As far as I can tell, serious conservatives haven't been touched. Watch as Trump supporters use every logical fallacy in the book to avoid this fact.

encom 6y ago
>serious conservatives haven't been touched Are you familiar with former american president Donald J. Trump? EDIT: And now I'm banned from posting. Thanks HN. Sorry I don't agree with your hive mind.
- sodality2 6y ago
  >Only election-truthers and violence peddlers Did you read the parent comment?

axiosgunnar 6y ago

What would happen if one were to publish a post with the author's full name and home address on such a service?

jimmysjohn279 6y ago

Wallstreetbets would undoubtedly also be a user here. They were worried about the discord channel being taken down, their reddit moderators being taken over, etc. Then the SEC started investigating. Strong anonymity would be of value to the retail trader mobs. Online mobs are not going away. They will get stronger.

zerez 6y ago

https://github.com/majestrate/bitchan https://github.com/majestrate/bitchan This seems already close enough to what the author is proposing. Even the language choice is the same. Your project will still require the users to download a 3rd party software to run it, which I believe to be the main problem with the current approaches. Therefore I don't see anything new this is bringing to the table. It's no different than downloading and running the imageboard above or downloading IPFS/ZeroNet and using one of the imageboards there.

anon20190221 6y ago
Yes, somewhat similar. Thanks for the link. The major difference here is that Pepe runs on a mix network similar to I2P, this helps hide your identity whereas anyone can see what you are doing with plain Bitcoin. To answer the question in your comment: yes, you can install and configure I2P, you can install iMule on top of it to exchange files and some distributed forum to post on. But the usability of all that is really low even for a pro-user. The performance is also not great because those systems were not designed to be used with each other from scratch.
- giveexamples 6y ago
  I wonder if it's possible to implement this via WebRTC and javascript? This would make it compatible with everyone with a browser, without need to develop an application for every platform. One stumbling block would be addressability without TURN.