4 ms·
No because people with enough influence will terminate your hosting, domain name, isp, bank account, or just get your site blocked. See kiwi farms, nigel farag
by Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y ago
No because people with enough influence will terminate your hosting, domain name, isp, bank account, or just get your site blocked. See kiwi farms, nigel farage, and the wikipedia-iwf dust-up.
Mastodon and the fediverse are close, maybe, but many instances refuse to "speak" to one another because of their users.
- mc32 3y agoExactly. Last election cycle we saw all sorts of excuses to deplatform certain communities and viewpoints, some very disagreeable but some just had a different point of view on some health related topics.
- bonzini 3y ago[flagged]
- Pannoniae 3y agoIt is a very good example though.... It's a horrendous site, but freedom of speech doesn't only apply to people I like or accept. Censorship always starts with the weakest and most hated target, then moves onto the less controversial ones.
- bonzini 3y ago> freedom of speech doesn't only apply to people I like or accept That is not the case in large parts of the world. WikiLeaks might be a better example.
- Pannoniae 3y ago"That is not the case in large parts of the world" that doesn't mean giving up and accepting it. "Are you defending X?"-type attacks are horrendous and just contribute to polarisation. Everyone deserves free speech, not just people I like.
- bonzini 3y agoIn large parts of the world people might not agree that everyone deserves free speech. Sorry for the early Godwin, but for example Nazi apology is not protected in Germany and I suspect most Germans agree that it shouldn't. Personally I am not sure why users and admins of Kiwifarms are not considered to be complicit in harassment and stalking (and also how in the world SWATting can basically go unpunished), which are crimes and not even protected by the first amendment. In contrast whistleblowing is protected.
- Pannoniae 3y agoI mean..... if it's a crime, okay, that's a law enforcement matter. If the kiwifarms site operators get convicted for harassment and stalking, that's fine by me. What is not fine by me is saying they don't deserve free speech even if they haven't committed a crime.
- bonzini 3y agoAnd again, this is anything but a universal value. Hate speech is not protected everywhere even in the absence of crimes, and many people over the world agree that it shouldn't.
- Pannoniae 3y agoExactly, and that's the problem. If people don't agree that it should be protected, then they don't really support free speech. Which is fine but then they shouldn't be surprised when the next person to be censored will be them.
- bonzini 3y agoWell those people just think the paradox of tolerance makes a sad but good point.
- Am4TIfIsER0ppos 3y agoWikileaks perhaps. They got cut off by mastercard but I don't recall hearing them lose their hosting or domain name. Although I wonder if you'd be one to consider them "russian disinformation" and therefore deserving of being shut down. The pirate bay? Lost many domain names at various times and probably hosting too. Are they also deserving of it due the the scale of the copyright infringement they help? Personally I think piracy is a moral imperative these days. Non-controversial sites do not get shut down.
- StuntPope 3y agoWikileaks had their DNS cut off by Dynect - who lied about it being because of a non-existent DoS attack, when in reality they were getting their nuts squeezed by the State Department to deplatform them. > Non-controversial sites do not get shut down. A.k.a "nothing to hide, nothing to fear".