The actual free speech absolutist position would be "if it's illegal, the government can intervene. Otherwise, it remains"
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by encryptluks2 on Saturday September 03, 2022 @08:22PM
(#32708128)
A majority of laws were written before the Internet existed. Be careful what you advocate for, because if you want police to be able to take down a domain via the registrar due to a possibly security threat, then that is what you'll get.
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by Acrobatic_Road on Saturday September 03, 2022 @07:23PM
(#32707495)
The wikipedia page is not honest and completely locked down.
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by JYellensFuckboy on Saturday September 03, 2022 @08:37PM
(#32708263)
Anecdotally, I've noticed an uptick in biased Wikipedia editing platforming questionable claims as facts. It's a bit concerning.
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by NaturalPhallacy on Sunday September 04, 2022 @05:07PM
(#32717732)
Wikipedia isn't trustworthy for anything political or controversial: https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/ <-written by one of the founders of it
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by rejectfinite on Saturday September 03, 2022 @07:28PM
(#32707553)
>Crimes were committed," "People lost their lives" bad. Unjustifiably bad.
Crimes are committed on Facebook, Messenger, Whatsapp, Instagram, Tor, Signal, Telegram everyday. Better take those down too.
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by OneOff1864 on Saturday September 03, 2022 @07:31PM
(#32707592)
Hi debacle, I was not a user but I perused the site and was fascinated with it. It appeared to be a big 'mumsnet', or a Facebook, but the only rules were to gossip about people others found interesting, to not interact with them directly, and of course, no child pornography. The website is cited I think for killing 3 people, a transgender male to female by the name of Chloe Segal who blamed KiwiFarms in her suicide note, but it is noted that her partner stated there were major issues with Chloe way before KiwiFarms and that she struggled with a lot prior to her death. I cannot remember the second, but the third was a fella in Japan who is cited as killing himself by a friend of his. I think the Kiwis gathered Japanese data from the police of deaths of foreign nationals and there were no American deaths for the timeframe the guy was meant to have died. It appears he may not be dead.
In terms of crimes, I think there were people who did make threats, there were two users if I remember who went on to commit shootings, but my counter to that is that Facebook too has had users who committed mass shootings. I believe the KiwiFarms wasn't the issue, more the actual users who did the crimes.
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by anotherrandom on Sunday September 11, 2022 @03:04AM
(#32797453)
And Cloudflare provides services to terrorist groups, does that make Cloudflare responsible for the actions of the terrorist groups?
If yes, Cloudflare is also responsible for death (and more of them) and should be shut down, if no then Kiwifarms is not responsible for death.
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by ShowsAlone on Saturday September 03, 2022 @07:46PM
(#32707754)
This is the individual that visited Keffels.
He admits it:
https://archive.ph/ksqln
If the individual also said they were a HN user would you be thinking HN is guilty?
Re:Blocking Kiwifarms
by phantom_of_cato on Saturday September 03, 2022 @07:20PM
(#32707457)
> I am a free speech absolutist, but
Then you are not a freedom speech absolutist (which is fine, and not completely unreasonable).
That said, is anyone willing to steelman this website? Could this possibly be construed as just a big misunderstanding?