9 ms·

> Cloudflare is an often brought up example And Cloudflare are nearly as well behaved as they could possibly be. The simple fact of them being everywhere makes

> Cloudflare is an often brought up example And Cloudflare are nearly as well behaved as they could possibly be. The simple fact of them being everywhere makes them a major target of government pressure to censor. This is purely an end run around the constitution, not the desire of companies to control speech. > It feels like private companies are de facto writing the laws about what's allowed online and in society right now, and that it's almost become a loophole for censoring free speech on a whim. And I don't think that the companies have any particular desire to censor. Zuckerberg would only censor speech about Facebook and himself personally. Dorsey seemed entirely blindsided by the pressures from the administration, three-letter agencies, and individual Congressmen based on the Twitter Files, and pushed back plenty. The three-letter agencies just placed dozens and dozens of people (who decided to quit the CIA, NSA, and FBI in their 30s for some reason and change careers) in the executive suites of every social network. It's being done in the open, and they're simply daring us to see corruption there. Hell, they've become conspiracy and foreign propaganda scientists, and they can detect the influence of the evil Russian and Chinese enemies of the state even in people who have no connections to Russians or Chinese people. It's their Russian and Chinese ideas that need to be eradicated, and all good communications channels and payments processors should be happy to help unless they are also secretly Russian. Wow did they go from coordinating banning Alex Jones to banning the last President in record time. Let's see how long it takes them to get from Kiwi Farms to The Grayzone or Rumble, or any newspaper that contradicts a government press release.

mptest 3y ago
>This is purely an end run around the constitution, not the desire of companies to control speech. Want an example of this type of end run being used in practice? Nearly a decade ago? Obama used banking access to do a similar end run around businesses deemed political enemies. Some to the good, weapons/ammunition sellers with uncertain scruples, payday lenders...[0] but for some reason I'm not super confident about its consistent use for the better.. [0] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-ope https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-ope...
- ratsmack 3y ago
  Your link goes to a 404, unfortunately.
  - philippejara 3y ago
    probably linking to this: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-operation-choke-point-finally-unmasked https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-ope...
  - mptest 3y ago
    Crap, sorry guys. Luckily the other commenter was right, he found the correct link. The third party hackernews app I'm using has weird behavior when I edit a comment causing my spacing to mess up (why no line break between quote and my comment) and it also caused the ... to no longer be considered part of the link. If anyone has a good rec for an iphone app for hn, i'd appreciate it.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
boppo1 3y ago
> The three-letter agencies just placed dozens and dozens of people (who decided to quit the CIA, NSA, and FBI in their 30s for some reason and change careers) in the executive suites of every social network. Where can I find more about this?
- pseudo0 3y ago
  There was some good reporting on this issue in the Twitter Files. For example, Jim Baker, the general counsel at Twitter, used to work for the FBI. Musk fired Baker for his role in suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story. https://jonathanturley.org/2022/12/04/six-degrees-from-james-baker-a-familiar-figure-reemerges-with-the-release-of-the-twitter-files/ https://jonathanturley.org/2022/12/04/six-degrees-from-james...
  - teslashill 3y ago
    [dead]
- puglr 3y ago
  Found the source[1]. It includes names and LinkedIn profiles, so ought to be verifiable. [1] https://www.mintpressnews.com/twitter-hiring-alarming-number-spooks-secret-agents/281114/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/twitter-hiring-alarming-number...
  - autoexec 3y ago
    That covers twitter, now what about every other social media network. The claim was that this was happening for all of them.
    - puglr 3y ago
      Oh sorry, you're right. Here's an article[1] about Facebook, from the same outlet. With some cursory searching I couldn't find anything about other social networks hiring former three letter agency employees. [1] https://www.mintpressnews.com/meet-ex-cia-agents-deciding-facebook-content-policy/281307/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/meet-ex-cia-agents-deciding-fa...
zeroCalories 3y ago
> And Cloudflare are nearly as well behaved as they could possibly be. This is not true. There has been at least two high profile cases where Cloudflare dropped their commitment to free speech when under no real legal pressure(kiwifarms and stormfromt). Maybe you think they did the right thing, but it's clear that they are not a neutral party.
- ratsmack 3y ago
  They also dropped the Daily Stormer from what I remember.
  - zeroCalories 3y ago
    You're right, I mixed the two sites up.
- TylerE 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - jimbob45 3y ago
    [flagged]
  - autoexec 3y ago
    And that's where problems arise. Most of us are comfortable oppressing people we disagree with. The reality is that you can't silence voices you don't like without making yourself vulnerable to the same treatment. We either value the freedom to express ourselves within the limits of the law or we don't. As soon as there are more people who think like you do, none of us are safe and it just becomes a system that silences whatever and whoever is unpopular enough.
    - TylerE 3y ago
      This isn't "people I disagree with". Stromfront, and the groups it enables, are literal nazis. "Stormfront began in 1990 as an online bulletin board supporting white nationalist David Duke's campaign for United States senator for Louisiana. The name "Stormfront" was chosen for its connotations of a political or military front (such as the German Nazi Sturmabteilung (also known as storm troopers or SA)) and an analogy with weather fronts that invokes the idea of a tumultuous storm ending in cleansing.[11] The Stormfront website has been registered at Network Solutions since 1995 and was founded in 1996 by Don Black, a former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s and a member of the National Socialist White People's Party." National Socialist White People = The American Nazi Party. That is literal. They changed from the NSWPP to the American Nazi Party in 1983. Their logo has a swastika on it. LITERAL NAZIS.
superchroma 3y ago
Kiwifarms isn't some kind of free voice of resistance or gazette, it's just a loose collection of volatile assholes who were banned from 4chan and reddit.
- bb88 3y ago
  It might also be a meeting place for conspirators to plan crimes.
  - sneak 3y ago
    So are bars. Should the electric company deny service to biker bars?
    - bb88 3y ago
      Do you really want the answer, or was that a question hoping to shame me? So if the biker bars are distributing child porn, or illegal drugs or guns, or using it as a place for conspiracy terrorism, then yeah, I say yes those corporations serving said bar should have a say. Particularly if the biker bar, e.g., violated the company's Christian morals. More importantly, this is supported by case law, today. The decisions of who a business chooses as it's customer is actively being challenged by conservatives in this country. See the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling. In this case the decision was overturned on religious grounds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colorado_Civil_Rights_Commission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colora... I would bet a significant amount that if an electric company didn't want to serve a biker bar on religious grounds (particularly if there was active criminal activity), they probably would get away with it. The last time I checked the constitution there wasn't a right to internet or electric or phone service. There was a right for religious beliefs, though.
      - kortilla 3y ago
        > More importantly, this is supported by case law, today. The Supreme Court ruling was not on using religion as an excuse not to serve. Supreme Court ruling was an about the commission violating a rule on religious neutrality. It set no precedent for the substance of the original suit. > I would bet a significant amount that if an electric company didn't want to serve a biker bar on religious grounds (particularly if there was active criminal activity), they probably would get away with it. You would be wrong. Electricity is not “creating expression”, which is what the lower courts were ruling on.
ExoticPearTree 3y ago
> Zuckerberg would only censor speech about Facebook and himself personally. Facebook is the mother of all censorship. Nudity, speech, political views just to name the top most. They only want people to post fluffy stuff on their website.
dang 3y ago
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37314778 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37314778.

mptest 3y ago

>This is purely an end run around the constitution, not the desire of companies to control speech. Want an example of this type of end run being used in practice? Nearly a decade ago? Obama used banking access to do a similar end run around businesses deemed political enemies. Some to the good, weapons/ammunition sellers with uncertain scruples, payday lenders...[0] but for some reason I'm not super confident about its consistent use for the better.. [0] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-ope https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-ope...

ratsmack 3y ago
Your link goes to a 404, unfortunately.
- philippejara 3y ago
  probably linking to this: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-operation-choke-point-finally-unmasked https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/obamas-ope...
- mptest 3y ago
  Crap, sorry guys. Luckily the other commenter was right, he found the correct link. The third party hackernews app I'm using has weird behavior when I edit a comment causing my spacing to mess up (why no line break between quote and my comment) and it also caused the ... to no longer be considered part of the link. If anyone has a good rec for an iphone app for hn, i'd appreciate it.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

boppo1 3y ago

> The three-letter agencies just placed dozens and dozens of people (who decided to quit the CIA, NSA, and FBI in their 30s for some reason and change careers) in the executive suites of every social network. Where can I find more about this?

pseudo0 3y ago
There was some good reporting on this issue in the Twitter Files. For example, Jim Baker, the general counsel at Twitter, used to work for the FBI. Musk fired Baker for his role in suppressing the Hunter Biden laptop story. https://jonathanturley.org/2022/12/04/six-degrees-from-james-baker-a-familiar-figure-reemerges-with-the-release-of-the-twitter-files/ https://jonathanturley.org/2022/12/04/six-degrees-from-james...
- teslashill 3y ago
  [dead]
puglr 3y ago
Found the source[1]. It includes names and LinkedIn profiles, so ought to be verifiable. [1] https://www.mintpressnews.com/twitter-hiring-alarming-number-spooks-secret-agents/281114/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/twitter-hiring-alarming-number...
- autoexec 3y ago
  That covers twitter, now what about every other social media network. The claim was that this was happening for all of them.
  - puglr 3y ago
    Oh sorry, you're right. Here's an article[1] about Facebook, from the same outlet. With some cursory searching I couldn't find anything about other social networks hiring former three letter agency employees. [1] https://www.mintpressnews.com/meet-ex-cia-agents-deciding-facebook-content-policy/281307/ https://www.mintpressnews.com/meet-ex-cia-agents-deciding-fa...

zeroCalories 3y ago

> And Cloudflare are nearly as well behaved as they could possibly be. This is not true. There has been at least two high profile cases where Cloudflare dropped their commitment to free speech when under no real legal pressure(kiwifarms and stormfromt). Maybe you think they did the right thing, but it's clear that they are not a neutral party.

ratsmack 3y ago
They also dropped the Daily Stormer from what I remember.
- zeroCalories 3y ago
  You're right, I mixed the two sites up.
TylerE 3y ago
[flagged]
- jimbob45 3y ago
  [flagged]
- autoexec 3y ago
  And that's where problems arise. Most of us are comfortable oppressing people we disagree with. The reality is that you can't silence voices you don't like without making yourself vulnerable to the same treatment. We either value the freedom to express ourselves within the limits of the law or we don't. As soon as there are more people who think like you do, none of us are safe and it just becomes a system that silences whatever and whoever is unpopular enough.
  - TylerE 3y ago
    This isn't "people I disagree with". Stromfront, and the groups it enables, are literal nazis. "Stormfront began in 1990 as an online bulletin board supporting white nationalist David Duke's campaign for United States senator for Louisiana. The name "Stormfront" was chosen for its connotations of a political or military front (such as the German Nazi Sturmabteilung (also known as storm troopers or SA)) and an analogy with weather fronts that invokes the idea of a tumultuous storm ending in cleansing.[11] The Stormfront website has been registered at Network Solutions since 1995 and was founded in 1996 by Don Black, a former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s and a member of the National Socialist White People's Party." National Socialist White People = The American Nazi Party. That is literal. They changed from the NSWPP to the American Nazi Party in 1983. Their logo has a swastika on it. LITERAL NAZIS.

superchroma 3y ago

Kiwifarms isn't some kind of free voice of resistance or gazette, it's just a loose collection of volatile assholes who were banned from 4chan and reddit.

bb88 3y ago
It might also be a meeting place for conspirators to plan crimes.
- sneak 3y ago
  So are bars. Should the electric company deny service to biker bars?
  - bb88 3y ago
    Do you really want the answer, or was that a question hoping to shame me? So if the biker bars are distributing child porn, or illegal drugs or guns, or using it as a place for conspiracy terrorism, then yeah, I say yes those corporations serving said bar should have a say. Particularly if the biker bar, e.g., violated the company's Christian morals. More importantly, this is supported by case law, today. The decisions of who a business chooses as it's customer is actively being challenged by conservatives in this country. See the Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling. In this case the decision was overturned on religious grounds. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colorado_Civil_Rights_Commission https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colora... I would bet a significant amount that if an electric company didn't want to serve a biker bar on religious grounds (particularly if there was active criminal activity), they probably would get away with it. The last time I checked the constitution there wasn't a right to internet or electric or phone service. There was a right for religious beliefs, though.
    - kortilla 3y ago
      > More importantly, this is supported by case law, today. The Supreme Court ruling was not on using religion as an excuse not to serve. Supreme Court ruling was an about the commission violating a rule on religious neutrality. It set no precedent for the substance of the original suit. > I would bet a significant amount that if an electric company didn't want to serve a biker bar on religious grounds (particularly if there was active criminal activity), they probably would get away with it. You would be wrong. Electricity is not “creating expression”, which is what the lower courts were ruling on.

ExoticPearTree 3y ago

> Zuckerberg would only censor speech about Facebook and himself personally. Facebook is the mother of all censorship. Nudity, speech, political views just to name the top most. They only want people to post fluffy stuff on their website.

dang 3y ago

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37314778 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37314778.