Hacker News Reader

Comment by Causality1 | Hacker News Reader

One feels compelled to point out that, despite 8chan being a breeding ground of hate, threads by mass shooters are typically removed in minutes and threats or manifestos containing identifying information are forwarded to the authorities, with at least one known incident being prevented by them, a planned shooting at Bethel Park High School.

Which, frankly, is the surprising part since I don't know why any sane person would set foot there. I visited once a few weeks after its founding and it had already degenerated to the point most regular users probably deserve to be on some kind of government list. Going there is just asking for trouble and I would urge anyone curious to look for screenshots instead of actually visiting the website.

View on HN

You need to make a distinction between 8chan as a website and /pol/ board. Imageboards are just places for unmoderated and free discussions, the topics are up to users (especially on 8chan, where they can even create their own boards, which is not possible on 4chan). Most of the discussions there are innocent in nature, it's always the same few boards which create shit like this.

Yeah, and part of the problem is that policy allows the bad boards to stick around so they multiply. In practice the bad policy means it doesn't matter how many good boards there are because there's a board next door hosting child porn or something.

This is a way more complicated topic than it sounds. If there was a board dedicated to planning and carrying out mass shootings, or other violent acts, I'm sure it would get deleted rather quickly. But when the topic of a board is "discussion of politics", it isn't illegal in nature.

It's the same reason why Reddit administrators hasn't deleted /r/the_donald yet, despite many of it's users breaking Reddit rules. It's hard to draw the line where it's acceptable to ban a whole community with "safe topic", because majority of posters are breaking the rules / law.

> despite 8chan being a breeding ground of hate, threads by mass shooters are typically removed in minutes

So, it is ok that people promote and help mass shooters as far as there is no direct connection the day of the attack?

> Going there is just asking for trouble and I would urge anyone curious to look for screenshots instead of actually visiting the website.

Is a screenshot of hate speech promoting hate less than a rendered HTML page?

I will imagine that an Islamic extremist site will be closed within minutes of gaining notoriety. Why are we sparing white-nationalist propaganda?

You'd be imagining wrong. Cloudflare left up ISIS websites because they said it isn't their job police content.

You know, I don’t necessarily disagree with Cloudlare’s take on “we shouldn’t be the internet police”, but do find it kind of funny that their ideology and approach conveniently aligns with being the absolute cheapest and laziest approach to the problem.

Which is every corporations modus operandi.

Oh, I'm not saying find a screenshot because it encourages them less, I'm saying find a screenshot because if you go there you risk being mentally scarred, to say nothing if someone sees it in your internet history or you're dumb enough to visit it on a corporate network or work laptop/phone. That would be a well-deserved firing, if not for being a racist then for being a moron.

>Why are we sparing white-nationalist propaganda?

Racist propaganda doesn't violate anyone's rights and is hence protected speech. Imminent threats and specific calls to violence are a different matter.

> Imminent threats and specific calls to violence are a different matter.

That is what I find disturbing. That general threads and calls to violence are ok. That threatening your neighbor is ok meanwhile you do not set a date and a time for the violence.

Finally, if I say that Coca-Cola causes cancer the Coca-Cola Company can sue me for lying. But, if I lie about your race is on because it only affects men, women and children economy, well-being and dignity but no corporation bottom line is hurt.

It seems that free of expression has some intriguing limitation when is convenient for some. Don't you think that racist propaganda may be protected because historical reasons and not any logic or benevolent intention?

Nope, free speech is free.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com