Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed
After 8chan Possibly Linked To Another Shooting, Cloudflare CEO Defends Hosting It (theguardian.com) 122
“If I could wave a magic wand and make all of the bad things that are on the internet go away — and I personally would put the Daily Stormer and 8chan in that category of bad things — I would wave that magic wand tomorrow,” [Cloudflare CEO Matthew] Prince said. “It would be the easiest thing in the world and it would feel incredibly good for us to kick 8chan off our network, but I think it would step away from the obligation that we have and cause that community to still exist and be more lawless over time.”
Prince argued that keeping “bad” sites within Cloudflare’s network means that the company is able to help monitor activity and flag illegal content to law enforcement. While he would not comment on specifics, he said that Cloudflare receives “regular requests” from law enforcement not to ban certain sites. “There are lots of competitors to Cloudflare that are not nearly as law abiding as we have always been,” he said. “The minute that someone isn’t on our network, they’re going to be on someone else’s network….” Prince also rejected any implication that Cloudflare’s position is self-interested. “The right answer from a pure business perspective is just to kick them off,” he said of 8chan. “Of the 2 million-plus Cloudflare customers, they don’t matter, and the pain that they cause is well beyond anything else.”
Keeping 8chan within its network is a “moral obligation”, he said, adding: “We, as well as all tech companies, have an obligation to think about how we solve real problems of real human suffering and death. What happened in El Paso is abhorrent in every possible way, and it’s ugly, and I hate that there’s any association between us and that… For us the question is which is the worse evil? Is the worse evil that we kick the can down the road and don’t take responsibility? Or do we get on the phone with people like you and say we need to own up to the fact that the internet is home to many amazing things and many terrible things and we have an absolute moral obligation to deal with that.”
Why would you want to stop this??? (Score:5, Insightful)
by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Sunday August 04, 2019 @05:46PM (#59039168)Shooters are announcing plans ahead of time on a channel and you want to shut it down?
The FBI only missed this last shooter by minutes, why stop letting insane morons announce intentions ahead of time so we can stop them?
We need more outlets for violent idiots to reveal themselves before it’s too late, not fewer.
My friend, I think you’ve underestimated some future contestants in the stupid game.
defend a forum that mainstreams these idiots
How is 8chan “mainstream” in any way? Hell it’s four beyond even *4chan*!!
It’s merely leaving a channel open that can be used to tune into the fringe thoughts that exist.
You seek to eliminate the channel, thinking it will eliminate the fringe thoughts themselves – has that ever worked? No, it has not.
Why not use that channel to monitor and find the truly evil among the fringe, instead of hiding your head in the sand and hoping evil goes away because your head is
DEATH TO THESE NAZI SCUMBAGS, ONE BY ONE. A PROUD AMERICAN TRADITION IS COMING BACK.
Ken Doll is job 1.
What would be really curious to see is, how do you distinguish yourself from the shooter in any way?
There’s no distinction as far as I can see. Should that not make you pause and reflect?
Hard left and hard right wrap around to collide at one point of burning hatred, a mix of ideology and madness that finds death as a reasonable and “right” solution to all problems. I reject your death cult sir, and in fac
We need more outlets for violent idiots to reveal themselves before it’s too late, not fewer.
Uh, careful with what you ask for. We reward narcissism in society today, and because of that society is filled with more narcissists than ever. More spotlights are not necessary a good thing. Like we need another dozen methods for nutjobs to live-stream killing sprees or rally copycat behavior? I think not.
Aside from the inaccurate claim that the FBI was somehow already on the way and only missed him by minutes, I don’t believe you understand the empowering role these forums play.
There’s the possibility that the shooters actions are dominantly performative rather ideological, in which case one might ask, do I want to participate in the performance.
The El Paso shooting is pretty clearly an anti-immigrant attack… by a lone wolf shooter, mind you.
But to be fair, what’s the Californian Republican minority leader to do? That’s a shit job, trying to spin the shooting up of a Walmart in El Paso as something other than gun violence or a hate crime.
“The FBI only missed this last shooter by minutes” – Complete lie
I can see why you might think it’s a lie, given that you live in a bubble and do not read the news [nypost.com] like I do.
I prefer to live in light instead of darkness.
Again, why shut down a very useful source of information others can use to tip off LE? I mean I seriously cannot comprehend a rational argument for this, can you provide one instead of just being mean?
- The New York Post is news? LOL!
- Your post is a lie. The fbi, according to your link, wasn’t even looking for the guy, and was nowhere in the area. According to other sources, police who were already in the area were able to respond quickly. Tips had zero to do with it.
Hopefully the families of the victims will sue cloudflare out of existence.
Mein Kampf ‘proved’ printing press is ‘evil’ (Score:2, Insightful)
by Anonymous CowardHitler was able to reach a wide audience for his book ‘Mein kampf’ thanks to the printing press, and the refusal of ‘authorities’ in the West to control access to the printing press. Ergo the printing press is ‘evil’ and should be shut down for the ‘greater good’.
WTF has any internet forum got to do with rando nutcases doing evil as rando nutcases have done across our entire Human History? Here’s a clue for the cretins who still use an account here. Every Human is self-justifying, regardless of true quality
- Censorship actually helped Hitler rise to power.
Initially the government did everything they could to stop him from spreading “hate”, but when he was put on trial it was reported in the papers and he was suddenly given a nation wide platform which he used to garner sympathy from ordinary folks. Hitler was able to reach a wide audience for his book ‘Mein kampf’ thanks to the printing press, and the refusal of ‘authorities’ in the West to control access to the printing press. Ergo the printing press is ‘evil’ and should be shut down for the ‘greater good’.
Early on in the rise of the Nazis in Germany, perhaps it would have been good to shut a few printing presses down. Just like, perhaps, shutting a few websites down.
Shut the whole web, or all printing presses down? Are you that stupid?
- by lgw ( 121541 )
Early on in the rise of the Nazis in Germany, perhaps it would have been good to shut a few printing presses down. Just like, perhaps, shutting a few websites down.
That’s exactly how Hitler rose to power in the party! His job was to shut down a few outlets opposed to his party, to help them win. Being the guy who could “shut down a few presses” is why he rose to power in the Nazi party.
Maybe read a little history?
What happened to America (Score:5, Insightful)
by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Sunday August 04, 2019 @05:51PM (#59039186) JournalMost of my life, there was no doubt about the importance of free speech. Somehow I had the misconception that every American knew things like, “I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death to defend your right to say it.”- If private social media companies are publishers, then they have the responsibility to vet literally everything posted on their site.
If they’re not publishers then they don’t have any right to choose what is posted since they’re a metaphorical town square.- by lgw ( 121541 )
If private social media companies are publishers, then they have the responsibility to vet literally everything posted on their site.
If they’re not publishers then they don’t have any right to choose what is posted since they’re a metaphorical town square.
That goes double for freaking Cloud Flare. They’re no more “hosting the content” than your ISP is.
It’s beyond time for congress to act to defend effective freedom of speech by forcing corporations to decide between publisher and platform. (And no, I don’t care at all about the “rights” of a publicly held corporation.)
- Section 230 of the CDA [eff.org] specifically carved out an exception for computer service providers for just this very reason.
It’s true that there are several right wing pundits and politicians who want to repeal or amend the CDA to remove those protections (most notably president Trump who would like to sue Facebook and Google for what their user’s post).
It’s ironic, because the right wing while attacking tech companies for failing to adhere to the principles of free speech are actively seeking a tool that
- Brief legal review: a private company is capable of engaging in censorship. And I am legally allowed to criticize them for it.
This has nothing to do with free speech. This has to do with a private company choosing what to publish and what not to publish.
It has everything to do with free speech. Free Speech is philosophical principle which states that people should be allowed to speak their minds without fear of being persecuted. We have it enshrined in our Constitution in order to prevent the Government from doing it.
Cloudfare isn’t a publisher. They’re a hosting provider, and if they want to be a Neutral provider as opposed to pushing an Agenda, they will host any and all Legal content. And if you believe in the idea of an open and free Internet, you will
Re:What happened to America (Score:4, Insightful)
by nonBORG ( 5254161 ) on Sunday August 04, 2019 @06:11PM (#59039286)I personally want these guys stopped, and the natural reaction is lets do stuff to make sure it does not happen again. However putting everyone in handcuffs so they cannot use a gun and stopping them speaking to each other so they cannot connect with other loons is possibly where the cure is worse than the disease. There is a lot of gun debate people who think that disarming will be effective, also the anti-free speech who say we need to stop them talking to each other. Even if these work are they an answer we can live with, not as individuals but as a country, I think the answer is no. But certainly we do need to stop this from happening perhaps we can be a little more imaginative than just the thought police.I believe it is in the motivation area we need to work, people need a purpose and stability. We have a issue with the family unit not being what it used to be and so many young people kill themselves or in this case worse. I know people will blame video games and movies (which I am not saying one way or the other on) but we really need influence to do the right thing. Taking away any influence to do wrong cannot solve the issue. Modern society has removed God, morals and the family unit then complains that society is breaking down perhaps think back to what was holding society together.
- NDGT isn’t sugar-coating his communications to the public anymore [twitter.com].
Although you might say he’s approaching [twitter.com] cranky old man syndrome [twitter.com].
There is a lot of gun debate people who think that disarming will be effective
Disclaimer: I am from an eastern-European country which has very strict gun control. I never touched a gun in my life, last time I saw one (except for police pea shooters) was back in 1996 at a neighbor who was a hunter (he had a couple hunting rifles).
Disarming in the USA is impossible. You’re over 100 years late for that to happen effectively.
I’m from the USA. I’ve never touched a gun in my life, and I don’t even recall if I’ve seen one in person except on police (probably have and it just wasn’t memorable, but it’s not frequent either).
I’ve never seen a mass shooting either (or any kind of shooting, though I’ve heard plenty of distant gunshots in the forest).
It’s a big country.
- by gijoel ( 628142 )Australia, Japan and Sweden have higher percentage of atheists than the US [wikipedia.org]. These countries don’t have mass shootings every day, much less than two a day. Which seems to be the norm in America. These countries also have stricter gun laws than the US. Maybe you should look at how easy it is to purchase a gun instead of bothering Jesus.
- Hate speech (however you might define something like that) is most certainly protected speech in the US. You can argue the merits of that but that is reality.
I rember when Reddit banned the fat shamming subreddits. Banning the subreddits didn’t prevent toxic comments on Reddit it just changed from being concentrated on one subreddit to being spread throughout Reddit. A ban would also be more likely to lead to further radicalization.
Humanity – in its entirety – is 100% proven to be the most vile, disgusting, pathetic, TRASH DNA that evolution has created.
Oh, but let’s not “condemn the whole program”, right?
(If my eyes rolled any harder, I’d be blind.)
- Is every link and every layer in the Internet going to be held responsible for anything bad on the Internet? Why stop at software, shouldn’t CPU and hard drive manufacturers also be held responsible? What about retailers who sell products to hosting companies who have something bad on a hard drive?
Shooters ranted on Facebook countless times. Remove that, and they will rant elsewhere. Remove that and they will rand else-elsewhere. And so on.
And if you somehow magically ban them from ranting everywhere, do you think they would (also magically) no longer put their intentions into practice?This is a knee-jerk reaction and look at the problem the wrong way. Instead of analyzing what prompted those shooters to do it and try to minimize the cause(s), all we discuss is whether this or that social media platf
- Shooters ranted on Facebook countless times. Remove that, and they will rant elsewhere. Remove that and they will rand else-elsewhere. And so on. And if you somehow magically ban them from ranting everywhere, do you think they would (also magically) no longer put their intentions into practice?
Crazy people have always ranted. The big difference with the Net is that these people’s ideas are amplified and magnified. The number of crazy people murdering lots of people has definitely gone up since the Net
That is a rather absolutist opinion you have. Are you possibly related to King George III?
IMHO, you are using IMHO too much.
- It’s funny how when you have literal ISIS Jihadis posting every day on Twitter, sending threats and trying to recruit people, the solution is “ban them from Twitter”.
But when you have a white guy who went on a shooting spree, who posted once on a website that liberals don’t like, the solution is “shut down the whole website and lock up the people who ran it”.The little punks on xchan (choose a number) would be banned from twitter for the conversations they engage in. So much for your equivalence.
The label usually applied to forums like the ones they participate in is ‘Fever Swamp.’ There are easy characteristics to identify those forums. Forums like this do exist for the left and the right, because no ism has a monopoly on that sort of sickness.
Those shooting are usually within a community and the people shooting and being shot are peers. This is different from an outsider showing up to kill a bunch of people he has little in common with.
- like Willem Van Spronsen not too long ago you never see anyone demanding they shut down the sites they posted on.
Its time for the lameness filter to flag on a few words like ‘faggot’ . And with a little AI, all the clever misspellings.
Fuck off, crapflooder.
- Probably because he didn’t kill anyone.
- by melted ( 227442 ) on Sunday August 04, 2019 @06:29PM (#59039362) Homepage
If the shooter posted a manifesto here on Slashdot, would it, or would it not, be “inked” to the shooting? If they share a manifesto on Google Docs (as terrorists often do, by Google’s own admission), is Google “linked” to the shooting?
If the shooter posted a manifesto here on Slashdot,
Have you been browsing at “-1”?
- by melted ( 227442 )
My point exactly.
- by Mal-2 ( 675116 )
Difference is, browsing 8chan is permanently at -1.
- I don’t see good to be done in taking this shit down. It’s vile, it’s terrible, but its existence doesn’t make the shootings happen. We’ve seen these people bitch before about being “marginalized” by society, and if we take away their forum we just play into their hand.
I did not read his manifesto, and that is part of freedom of speech – nobody is guaranteed an audience. If his manifesto did not itself break the law then he should have been allowed to post it. We know that we had mass shootings befo
Re:Finish explaining how you’re dealing with it. (Score:5, Insightful)
by guruevi ( 827432 ) <evi&evcircuits,com> on Sunday August 04, 2019 @06:03PM (#59039254) HomepageHe did, he’s providing a platform and isn’t passing the problem on. Now what are you going to do about CNN, Fox and others spewing divisions in one way or the other day-in-and-out.
You’re not going to solve it winning an election, you have to have concrete and actionable answers. Having a better economy is one thing, making people feel safer in their own towns and cities is also a thing, having people feel like they have a chance at defending themselves in these situations, armed guards or police in schools etc.
- by dryeo ( 100693 )
Generally people are safer then in many years. The problem is that fear sells so you have private enterprises (Amazon Ring and such) pushing fear, you have media of all types pushing fear to sell eyeballs, you have police departments pushing fear for bigger budgets and you have politicians pushing fear for more votes.
Rational speech doesn’t offset that fear, censorship is a cure worse then the disease. There doesn’t really seem like there’s any good solutions as fear is just too easy to feed.“Generally people are safer then in many years.”
I’m going to assume English is your third language and leave the syntax of that sentence alone.
So long as you define “people” as “White Citizens w/ Money” you are correct. Alas, if you acknowledge that there are many more kinds of people than that, then your claim becomes quite ludicrous indeed. I especially love how you say Police are “pushing fear.” I mean they are, but not in quite the way you seem to mean it, unless of course you are referring to shooting
“and we have an absolute moral obligation to deal with that.” – Go on….
When law enforcement is actually asking a hosting provider to not ban hosted sites regardless of why they may be perfectly justified to do so, I’d say that’s a pretty clear indication that the relationship between that vendor and law enforcement is not only well-established, but valued.
In other words, they’re demonstrating their moral obligation. Not sure why you feel you’re warranted the exact details.
There may be more comments in this discussion. Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to turn on Classic Discussion System in your preferences instead.
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
- 974 commentsFacebook Bans Alex Jones, Yiannopoulos, Other Far-Right Figures
- 774 commentsJordan Peterson Announces Free Speech, Anti-Censorship Platform ‘Thinkspot’
- 729 commentsFacebook Employees Outraged Over Exec’s Appearance at Kavanaugh Hearing
- 719 commentsAnti-Tesla Pickup Truck Drivers Take Over a Supercharger Station — Again
- 636 commentsDrivers Think Bikers Are Less Than Human, Survey Says
Slashdot Top Deals
- Get more comments
- 100 of 122 loaded
“Intelligence without character is a dangerous thing.” — G. Steinem
