7 ms·

If you want to argue that internet infrastructure providers should be blocking access to areas of the internet due to bad consequences and "being able to sleep

by arp242 3y ago

If you want to argue that internet infrastructure providers should be blocking access to areas of the internet due to bad consequences and "being able to sleep at night", then there many more obvious and larger targets. The amount of attention KiwiFarms gets is ridiculously outsized for what it is: a fairly small forum with a bunch of mean-spirited people telling mean-spirited "jokes". It's a very odd target for all these free speech issues.

X6S1x6Okd1st 3y ago
That's an extremely charitable description of what KiwiFarms is. What's your list of things to block that are higher up the list?
- aydyn 3y ago
  I dunno, terrorists?
  - richbell 3y ago
    Animal torture videos
  - lucubratory 3y ago
    Those are blocked, and KiwiFarms engages in terrorism.
    - aydyn 3y ago
      [flagged]
  - zakki 3y ago
    Based on this[1] Wikipedia link I’ll put them in the terrorists forums. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - aydyn 3y ago
      [flagged]
- unsignednoop 3y ago
  [dead]
- LinuxBender 3y ago
  - Corporations that obtain your data and then sell it or abuse it even if said abuse is permitted in some fine print. - Countries that commit crimes against humanity but those should be fully physically blockaded rather than just blocking their internet. - ISP's and ISP resellers that aid and abet watering holes, phishing sites, scams, etc... and probably also entire countries that refuse to lift a finger to stop scam call centers should be globally BGP filtered .
  - X6S1x6Okd1st 3y ago
    Blocking a country due to scam call centers is kind of horrifying collective punishment. The argument in the article is suggesting that blocking something so bad they will not defend it nor do they even want to look like they are defending it should not be done because of the slippery slope, meanwhile you've leapt straight to partitioning the internet cutting off billions of people.
    - LinuxBender 3y ago
      Blocking a country due to scam call centers is kind of horrifying collective punishment. That it is and that is the point / goal. It would be in place about a day if even that long. Their government would go round up all the scam center scammers as they already know who and where they all are and the block would be lifted assuming it even managed to escalate to that point. FWIW I was just answering the question of who who deserves some attention prior to doing anything with the unhealthy trolls at KF. This is assuming anyone even had the ability to do anything I suggested. I would honestly prefer sites like KF stick around so they can be infiltrated by law enforcement to watch for the planning of bad things and I am making a massive assumption that glowies won't instigate the bad things to justify budgets but that's also a big topic in and of itself.
      - X6S1x6Okd1st 3y ago
        Let's take India as an example: 1) They clearly are able to tolerate being locked out of the internet at least in limited fashion, this is regularly being used to control domestic protests.: https://internetshutdowns.in/ https://internetshutdowns.in/ 2) If an external party imposes a constraint on a nationalistic government the govt can use this external attack to help bind their country together.
- junofan 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - EarlKing 3y ago
    You mean, like, a court of law, where people are only tried for things that are actual crimes instead of behaviors you find personally offensive?
  - chonkerz 3y ago
    Let's put the government in charge!
  - habinero 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - ajvs 3y ago
      Wanting fair trials is a rule that applies to nobody else? It's a pretty fundamental requirement for democracy.
      - habinero 3y ago
        This is not about democracy. This is a private company. If Whole Foods doesn't have to hold a public tribunal to ban someone from their store, then ISPs don't, either.
      - clarionbell 3y ago
        Not exactly. It's fundamental to specific flavor of western democracy that has become common in the world, at least on paper. But you can have democracy without it. In fact you can have democracy with lot of other characteristics that seem weird today, like randomly chosen representatives, slavery, exile etc. It's largely orthogonal.
    - zo1 3y ago
      Dude, stop repeating this same thing. Everyone disagreeing with anti-kiwi farm stuff is immediately a "common Kiwifarmer tactic" according to you. I count at least 9 similar comments made by you in this thread alone. I don't even know how someone can spam a thread with 9 comments without being throttled. @dang - please have a look at this spam? This is an important discussion to be had and having this kind of inflammatory stuff is not productive.
heavyset_go 3y ago
> The amount of attention KiwiFarms gets is ridiculously outsized for what it is: a fairly small forum with a bunch of mean-spirited people telling mean-spirited "jokes" The site is probably one of the only sources of actual gang stalking on the planet, and when it isn't stalking and harassing people on an industrial scale, it also moonlights as a suicide factory. The psychopaths that run and participate on the site are proud of their body count.
- richbell 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - BoorishBears 3y ago
    As someone who agrees ISPs shouldn't get to be judge, jury, and executioner on censorship, I find it really odd when people go out of their ways to defend absolute cesspits every time the censorship issue comes up. Kiwi Farms is an irredeemable cesspit by every measure I can see, and accepting that makes your argument stronger. Trying to act like it's an innocent place, or this place is ok because you're familiar with 100 even worse places just makes you look unreasonable. All it serves to do is muddy the waters between being anti-censorship and being pro-cesspit, and I'm not the former.
    - richbell 3y ago
      [flagged]
      - vintermann 3y ago
        In their speak, "Is this the hill you want to die on". In other words, if there's something redeemable going on on KF, do you really want to even know? Because then your options are to stick your head out for unsympathetic people, or feeling bad about what's going on.
    - arp242 3y ago
      But this is a very dangerous argument you're making: "who cares if people are making up complete nonsense about them, they're bad anyway?!" I'm not trying to be uncharitable, but that is more or less the core of your argument. I don't want to "defend" anyone; I just want to have an accurate understanding of the truth, insofar that's possible. It bothers me so much misinformation is being spread about this and I think this is also harmful overall for many reasons. This was, IMHO, also the problem with Stallman: yes, Stallman was/is not good and should have stepped down a million years ago (in my opinion, anyway), but no, he's not a transphobic sexist nonce and most of those claims are complete bollocks. But hey, who's going to defend an asshole like Stallman? Especially when a significant section of his more fanatical fanbase is so ... unpleasant (in my experience, anyway)?
habinero 3y ago
[flagged]
bagdad 3y ago
[dead]
thrwaway1234567 3y ago
>a fairly small forum with a bunch of mean-spirited people telling mean-spirited "jokes". That is true, but that is only part of the story. If that was all, the website would not be so notorious. Kiwifarms, now banned, official twitter page said their goal was “exploitation of the mentally handicapped for amusement purposes”. ( Source: https://archive.is/jYp5p https://archive.is/jYp5p ). I think Kiwifarms is (borderline) criminal. Null, the admin of the site, outright said he was ok with users posting stolen financial information, such as Social Security Numbers and Credit cards. Source: https://archive.is/0fOcS https://archive.is/0fOcS . There are many examples of private financial information being posted on the site. I would describe them as operating with a paper thin layer of "plausible" deniability. Officially you aren't allowed to harass or interact with the targets. But posting their home address, stolen passwords, phone numbers, and information about relatives is all allowed. Obviously, if they didn't want their targets harassed, they wouldn't post that. But even the rule against interacting with "lolcows" (called "cowtipping") is haphazardly enforced. For example, one user had sex with a "lolcow" and posted photos. The admin explicitly said they would allow the content to remain up: https://archive.is/zYnpK#35% https://archive.is/zYnpK#35% I could probably post many other examples.

by arp242 3y ago

X6S1x6Okd1st 3y ago

That's an extremely charitable description of what KiwiFarms is. What's your list of things to block that are higher up the list?

aydyn 3y ago
I dunno, terrorists?
- richbell 3y ago
  Animal torture videos
- lucubratory 3y ago
  Those are blocked, and KiwiFarms engages in terrorism.
  - aydyn 3y ago
    [flagged]
- zakki 3y ago
  Based on this[1] Wikipedia link I’ll put them in the terrorists forums. 1. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - aydyn 3y ago
    [flagged]
unsignednoop 3y ago
[dead]
LinuxBender 3y ago
- Corporations that obtain your data and then sell it or abuse it even if said abuse is permitted in some fine print. - Countries that commit crimes against humanity but those should be fully physically blockaded rather than just blocking their internet. - ISP's and ISP resellers that aid and abet watering holes, phishing sites, scams, etc... and probably also entire countries that refuse to lift a finger to stop scam call centers should be globally BGP filtered .
- X6S1x6Okd1st 3y ago
  Blocking a country due to scam call centers is kind of horrifying collective punishment. The argument in the article is suggesting that blocking something so bad they will not defend it nor do they even want to look like they are defending it should not be done because of the slippery slope, meanwhile you've leapt straight to partitioning the internet cutting off billions of people.
  - LinuxBender 3y ago
    Blocking a country due to scam call centers is kind of horrifying collective punishment. That it is and that is the point / goal. It would be in place about a day if even that long. Their government would go round up all the scam center scammers as they already know who and where they all are and the block would be lifted assuming it even managed to escalate to that point. FWIW I was just answering the question of who who deserves some attention prior to doing anything with the unhealthy trolls at KF. This is assuming anyone even had the ability to do anything I suggested. I would honestly prefer sites like KF stick around so they can be infiltrated by law enforcement to watch for the planning of bad things and I am making a massive assumption that glowies won't instigate the bad things to justify budgets but that's also a big topic in and of itself.
    - X6S1x6Okd1st 3y ago
      Let's take India as an example: 1) They clearly are able to tolerate being locked out of the internet at least in limited fashion, this is regularly being used to control domestic protests.: https://internetshutdowns.in/ https://internetshutdowns.in/ 2) If an external party imposes a constraint on a nationalistic government the govt can use this external attack to help bind their country together.
junofan 3y ago
[flagged]
- EarlKing 3y ago
  You mean, like, a court of law, where people are only tried for things that are actual crimes instead of behaviors you find personally offensive?
- chonkerz 3y ago
  Let's put the government in charge!
- habinero 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - ajvs 3y ago
    Wanting fair trials is a rule that applies to nobody else? It's a pretty fundamental requirement for democracy.
    - habinero 3y ago
      This is not about democracy. This is a private company. If Whole Foods doesn't have to hold a public tribunal to ban someone from their store, then ISPs don't, either.
    - clarionbell 3y ago
      Not exactly. It's fundamental to specific flavor of western democracy that has become common in the world, at least on paper. But you can have democracy without it. In fact you can have democracy with lot of other characteristics that seem weird today, like randomly chosen representatives, slavery, exile etc. It's largely orthogonal.
  - zo1 3y ago
    Dude, stop repeating this same thing. Everyone disagreeing with anti-kiwi farm stuff is immediately a "common Kiwifarmer tactic" according to you. I count at least 9 similar comments made by you in this thread alone. I don't even know how someone can spam a thread with 9 comments without being throttled. @dang - please have a look at this spam? This is an important discussion to be had and having this kind of inflammatory stuff is not productive.

heavyset_go 3y ago

> The amount of attention KiwiFarms gets is ridiculously outsized for what it is: a fairly small forum with a bunch of mean-spirited people telling mean-spirited "jokes" The site is probably one of the only sources of actual gang stalking on the planet, and when it isn't stalking and harassing people on an industrial scale, it also moonlights as a suicide factory. The psychopaths that run and participate on the site are proud of their body count.

richbell 3y ago
[flagged]
- BoorishBears 3y ago
  As someone who agrees ISPs shouldn't get to be judge, jury, and executioner on censorship, I find it really odd when people go out of their ways to defend absolute cesspits every time the censorship issue comes up. Kiwi Farms is an irredeemable cesspit by every measure I can see, and accepting that makes your argument stronger. Trying to act like it's an innocent place, or this place is ok because you're familiar with 100 even worse places just makes you look unreasonable. All it serves to do is muddy the waters between being anti-censorship and being pro-cesspit, and I'm not the former.
  - richbell 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - vintermann 3y ago
      In their speak, "Is this the hill you want to die on". In other words, if there's something redeemable going on on KF, do you really want to even know? Because then your options are to stick your head out for unsympathetic people, or feeling bad about what's going on.
  - arp242 3y ago
    But this is a very dangerous argument you're making: "who cares if people are making up complete nonsense about them, they're bad anyway?!" I'm not trying to be uncharitable, but that is more or less the core of your argument. I don't want to "defend" anyone; I just want to have an accurate understanding of the truth, insofar that's possible. It bothers me so much misinformation is being spread about this and I think this is also harmful overall for many reasons. This was, IMHO, also the problem with Stallman: yes, Stallman was/is not good and should have stepped down a million years ago (in my opinion, anyway), but no, he's not a transphobic sexist nonce and most of those claims are complete bollocks. But hey, who's going to defend an asshole like Stallman? Especially when a significant section of his more fanatical fanbase is so ... unpleasant (in my experience, anyway)?

habinero 3y ago

[flagged]

bagdad 3y ago

[dead]

thrwaway1234567 3y ago

>a fairly small forum with a bunch of mean-spirited people telling mean-spirited "jokes". That is true, but that is only part of the story. If that was all, the website would not be so notorious. Kiwifarms, now banned, official twitter page said their goal was “exploitation of the mentally handicapped for amusement purposes”. ( Source: https://archive.is/jYp5p https://archive.is/jYp5p ). I think Kiwifarms is (borderline) criminal. Null, the admin of the site, outright said he was ok with users posting stolen financial information, such as Social Security Numbers and Credit cards. Source: https://archive.is/0fOcS https://archive.is/0fOcS . There are many examples of private financial information being posted on the site. I would describe them as operating with a paper thin layer of "plausible" deniability. Officially you aren't allowed to harass or interact with the targets. But posting their home address, stolen passwords, phone numbers, and information about relatives is all allowed. Obviously, if they didn't want their targets harassed, they wouldn't post that. But even the rule against interacting with "lolcows" (called "cowtipping") is haphazardly enforced. For example, one user had sex with a "lolcow" and posted photos. The admin explicitly said they would allow the content to remain up: https://archive.is/zYnpK#35% https://archive.is/zYnpK#35% I could probably post many other examples.