They're referring to a niche academic term that has within the past few years started gaining usage outside of academia. It can be approximately defined as[0]:

> The use of mass public communication, usually against a particular individual or group, which incites or inspires acts of terrorism which are statistically probable but happen seemingly at random.

[0]: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/stochastic_terrorism

Only very loose connection to the stochastic processes of mathematics.

Sounds synonymous to "speech that could anger people". What a load of bollocks.

irrelevant degree for the term. you’re like a meteorologist flaunting their academic credentials to show that thundering herd is not a real thing in software engineering

Other forums don't allow posting some kinds of information because they know allowing it means swatting.

And? That doesn't make those sites pro-swatting unless they had no other legitimate reasons to allow this content, and as much as people hate doxxing it is clearly not only useful for swatting or other illegal activities.

> as much as people hate doxxing it is clearly not only useful for swatting or other illegal activities.

What other use has come from posting home addresses on Kiwi Farms?

Home addresses can be used to find lots of other public records associated with an individual.

What use has come from that?

Not that this example is relevant to this thread, but owning shell companies?

I agree it's not relevant to this thread. And how many shell company owners used their home addresses?

I've owned something similar to a shell company before and used my home address as required by local laws. Obviously some more nefarious actors would not but plenty of stupid criminals around.

You didn't answer the question. And people only care about shell companies when used to hide true ownership of something else.

I don't know the statistics of how many shell company owners use their home address nor do I know of any sources for such information.

What’s your source, KF’s owner’s public statements and posturing? lmao

Mostly a general skepticism towards clearly-opportunistic attempts to engage in composition fallacies.

The purpose of a system is what it does.

No one actually believes this outside of brain-rotted partisan contexts. eg. The fact that I'm not donating all my money to combat malaria in developing nations does not make me pro-malaria.

> No one actually believes this outside of brain-rotted partisan contexts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_purpose_of_a_system_is_wha...

> The fact that I'm not donating all my money to combat malaria in developing nations does not make me pro-malaria.

Are you a system?

Is this forum a system?

Is ycombinator's failure to delete the posts of me and others in this thread also indicative of an intent to "use violence as a means of enforcing social order, by encouraging stochastic and opportunistic terrorism against trans people"?

> Is ycombinator's failure to delete the posts of me and others in this thread also indicative of an intent to "use violence as a means of enforcing social order, by encouraging stochastic and opportunistic terrorism against trans people"?

Do you think your comments and this forum increase stochastic and opportunistic terrorism against trans people? Probably you don't think Kiwi Farms does either. But you chose a different argument.

yes lol, just look at yc ceo’s political activism and yc’s public championing of it

I would be interested in knowing what percentage of the users of this website agree with that statement, I doubt it's particularly high.

Null isn't banning these people. He's encouraging them with a wink or a nod. It's like Nazis and bars. See a Nazi, 86 the Nazi or the friends will show up and make your bar a Nazi bar.