2 ms·

But free speech is not being "squelched" in any way. Can you explain why you think it is?

mlyle 4y ago
I feel like it is thoroughly explained above and my other counterparts in conversation understand the point. I am also not sure you're conversing in good faith. You're tossing out pithy one-liners that demand greater effort to respond to than to say them. This was also my experience a long time ago when we used to discuss things on IRC (including, I believe, this exact topic).
- Gordonjcp 4y ago
  Again, there's a difference between your free speech being "squelched", and no-one wanting to entertain your nonsense, and you haven't really explained why you think there isn't.
  - mlyle 4y ago
    See danShumway's comment that puts it better than me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32712819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32712819 Concentrated power in the path of speech or commerce is dangerous, whether it's governmental or private. Many parties deciding independently whether to "entertain my nonsense" is good. One critical party in the path (governmental or commercial) is bad.
    - Gordonjcp 4y ago
      Okay, but there is no "concentrated power". You are just as free as anyone else to host KF.
      - mlyle 4y ago
        > Okay, but there is no "concentrated power". You are just as free as anyone else to host KF. We're not talking about hosting KF. There's lots of hosts. And Cloudflare was not hosting KF, but instead providing DDoS protection services. But there's approximately 2-3 services that can reject DDoS at high scale. Or maybe slightly more. This is right at the threshold of concern. Here, I think the decision that was made was a good one, but at the same time a very small number of unaccountable parties making this kind of determination is worrying.
        Gordonjcp 4y ago
        So either don't host stuff that gets you DDoSed, or work out a way to spin up something else that copes with rejecting DDoS at scale. Either way, if you're saying something so reprehensible that no-one will allow you to use their platform to say it, maybe you should look at what you're saying.
        mlyle 4y ago
        It's really at the point where I need to repeat the same thing: > > > Many parties deciding independently whether to "entertain my nonsense" is good. One critical party in the path (governmental or commercial) is bad. Have a nice rest of your day; I'm done.

I feel like it is thoroughly explained above and my other counterparts in conversation understand the point. I am also not sure you're conversing in good faith. You're tossing out pithy one-liners that demand greater effort to respond to than to say them. This was also my experience a long time ago when we used to discuss things on IRC (including, I believe, this exact topic).

Gordonjcp 4y ago
Again, there's a difference between your free speech being "squelched", and no-one wanting to entertain your nonsense, and you haven't really explained why you think there isn't.
- mlyle 4y ago
  See danShumway's comment that puts it better than me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32712819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32712819 Concentrated power in the path of speech or commerce is dangerous, whether it's governmental or private. Many parties deciding independently whether to "entertain my nonsense" is good. One critical party in the path (governmental or commercial) is bad.
  - Gordonjcp 4y ago
    Okay, but there is no "concentrated power". You are just as free as anyone else to host KF.
    - mlyle 4y ago
      > Okay, but there is no "concentrated power". You are just as free as anyone else to host KF. We're not talking about hosting KF. There's lots of hosts. And Cloudflare was not hosting KF, but instead providing DDoS protection services. But there's approximately 2-3 services that can reject DDoS at high scale. Or maybe slightly more. This is right at the threshold of concern. Here, I think the decision that was made was a good one, but at the same time a very small number of unaccountable parties making this kind of determination is worrying.
      - Gordonjcp 4y ago
        So either don't host stuff that gets you DDoSed, or work out a way to spin up something else that copes with rejecting DDoS at scale. Either way, if you're saying something so reprehensible that no-one will allow you to use their platform to say it, maybe you should look at what you're saying.
        mlyle 4y ago
        It's really at the point where I need to repeat the same thing: > > > Many parties deciding independently whether to "entertain my nonsense" is good. One critical party in the path (governmental or commercial) is bad. Have a nice rest of your day; I'm done.