4 ms·

Domain registrars and webhosts are canceling accounts based on content, so no, not anyone can use the internet to communicate.

by sejje 4y ago

abathur 4y ago
There's a substitution, here. The GP's statement is still roughly correct: approximately anyone can use the internet to communicate. Everyone using other people's infrastructure to communicate on the internet is to some degree subject to content restrictions.
- sejje 4y ago
  "The internet" has "other people's infrastructure" built in to its very fabric. You cannot have the internet without other people's infrastructure, whether in 1995 or 2022.
  - abathur 4y ago
    Fiddling with semantics in order to ignore the point: Approximately everyone can use it to communicate--they just can't use it to communicate every thing.
peoplefromibiza 4y ago
you don't need a domain and a web host to comunicate. it's easier, nobody can deny that, but phone companies don't sell you a name, they sell you an address and the right to use the pipes. if people have the will they have the means. freedom of speech doesn't mean that speech should be provided free of charge by private companies. But honestly you can move your domain on any maintainer you want.
- sejje 4y ago
  I didn't say for free, I don't think anything is or should be free. We have "the phone company" equivalent on the internet (registrars and hosts) denying access to ideologies they don't approve of. If you don't think that's denying speech, then let's just agree to disagree.
  - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
    the equivalent is an IP address. having said that, in 2022 with a fiber connection and a 200$ NAS (with a very user friendly web interface) you can host a DNS, a web server, a WordPress instance, a mail server, a mastodon instance and serve a lot of content. that's what decentralized internet is all about.
    - sejje 4y ago
      I agree in theory an IP address is the equivalent, but I still think registrars denying domains to particular groups based on ideologies is a freedom of speech issue. Way off on a tangent here, but do you happen to recommend a particular NAS? I'm in the market.
      - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
        whatever hardware you can find and Freenas (Truenas core now).
    - Karunamon 4y ago
      …and anybody who dislikes that speech can order a botnet to make your connection unusable, and it is very unlikely that the perpetrators will ever be caught. Going back to the Cloudflare example, the organizers of that campaign did not want Cloudflare to withdraw service because they thought that this would take the site down, they wanted them to withdraw service because this would make them vulnerable to criminal activity (DDOS). And, sure enough, that is exactly what has happened.
      - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
        I mean, if people hate your speech so much that they are willing to spend resources to silent you, you have to consider how much you value your freedom of speech. because a private company surely don't value it as much as you do and won't protect you especially if what you say ends up in a DDOS attempt for them. mainly because they don't have to. your freedoms are your responsibility.

Domain registrars and webhosts are canceling accounts based on content, so no, not anyone can use the internet to communicate.

by sejje 4y ago

Domain registrars and webhosts are canceling accounts based on content, so no, not anyone can use the internet to communicate.

abathur 4y ago

There's a substitution, here. The GP's statement is still roughly correct: approximately anyone can use the internet to communicate. Everyone using other people's infrastructure to communicate on the internet is to some degree subject to content restrictions.

sejje 4y ago
"The internet" has "other people's infrastructure" built in to its very fabric. You cannot have the internet without other people's infrastructure, whether in 1995 or 2022.
- abathur 4y ago
  Fiddling with semantics in order to ignore the point: Approximately everyone can use it to communicate--they just can't use it to communicate every thing.

peoplefromibiza 4y ago

you don't need a domain and a web host to comunicate. it's easier, nobody can deny that, but phone companies don't sell you a name, they sell you an address and the right to use the pipes. if people have the will they have the means. freedom of speech doesn't mean that speech should be provided free of charge by private companies. But honestly you can move your domain on any maintainer you want.

sejje 4y ago
I didn't say for free, I don't think anything is or should be free. We have "the phone company" equivalent on the internet (registrars and hosts) denying access to ideologies they don't approve of. If you don't think that's denying speech, then let's just agree to disagree.
- peoplefromibiza 4y ago
  the equivalent is an IP address. having said that, in 2022 with a fiber connection and a 200$ NAS (with a very user friendly web interface) you can host a DNS, a web server, a WordPress instance, a mail server, a mastodon instance and serve a lot of content. that's what decentralized internet is all about.
  - sejje 4y ago
    I agree in theory an IP address is the equivalent, but I still think registrars denying domains to particular groups based on ideologies is a freedom of speech issue. Way off on a tangent here, but do you happen to recommend a particular NAS? I'm in the market.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      whatever hardware you can find and Freenas (Truenas core now).
  - Karunamon 4y ago
    …and anybody who dislikes that speech can order a botnet to make your connection unusable, and it is very unlikely that the perpetrators will ever be caught. Going back to the Cloudflare example, the organizers of that campaign did not want Cloudflare to withdraw service because they thought that this would take the site down, they wanted them to withdraw service because this would make them vulnerable to criminal activity (DDOS). And, sure enough, that is exactly what has happened.
    - peoplefromibiza 4y ago
      I mean, if people hate your speech so much that they are willing to spend resources to silent you, you have to consider how much you value your freedom of speech. because a private company surely don't value it as much as you do and won't protect you especially if what you say ends up in a DDOS attempt for them. mainly because they don't have to. your freedoms are your responsibility.