Comment on The endless battle to banish the world’s most notorious stalker website

• jet@hackertalks.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  If the government can’t do anything about it, why should we empower corporations too? It seems the solution to your scenario would be a more elegant legal system that the government could use to go after people conspiring to commit murder. Which I’m pretty sure are two major crimes already.

  But that’s moot. If you agree that access to communication and the internet is a basic human right, then somebody who is not been legally sequestered, should have access to their basic human right.

  source

  • pqdinfo@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    If the government can’t do anything about it, why should we empower corporations too?

    Wait, what?

    Because in this specific case, and yes, you have to address it case by case, the government being able to do something about it would involve draconian anti-privacy international web monitoring of a level that’s literally described in 1984, while the corporation being involved merely involves the corporation cutting off a route knowing that it’ll be publicly debated afterwards and may, if the decision is a bad one, result in it losing business.

    But that’s moot. If you agree that access to communication and the internet is a basic human right, then somebody who is not been legally sequestered, should have access to their basic human right.

    No. There is no human right to organize the killing of people because you don’t like a harmless mental condition they were born with. There is, as a result, no absolute right to access the Internet.

    And contrary to this absolutist nonsense that’s been posted about how if an ISP bans even one packet under the most justifiable circumstances imaginable, it means Marsha Blackburn is going to go back in time and propose her laws that she’s already proposed to ban LGBT information from the Internet, ISPs have never provided this kind of absolute right in the first place. ISPs can and do block, and sometimes kick, for any of the following:

    1. Attempting to send email via SMTP except via their own service.
    2. Running a "server"
    3. BitTorrent
    4. (Including this to give you some idea of how this isn’t a new thing) Abusive use of Usenet including spam, trolling, posting pornography into the wrong groups, etc.
    5. Spam

    We tolerate this because… well, we tolerate the anti-spam part and we tolerated the anti-abuse of Usenet parts because we accept that people use the Internet abusively and an ISP, at whatever level, has a right to protect itself, its employees, and even society at large.

    But here you all are claiming that this is all OK, and remaining silent even on the stuff ISPs block that aren’t actually justifiable (what business is it of anyone if I run a webserver from my home or bypass an ISPs SMTP server?), but when it comes to blocking a website whose sole purpose is to organize actions that will result in the deaths of trans people, you all think ISPs should take no action.

    Spam? The worst thing ever.

    Killing trans people? Eh. Who cares.

    source

    • jet@hackertalks.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      The answer to international conspiracies are hard is not mob justice.

      source

      • pqdinfo@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        ISPs refusing to carry data is not “mob justice”.

        source
• Meowoem@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  You do realise the trans communities will be affected by this too? This isn’t some magic wand that only the good guys can use, republicans will be using it to ban LGBT information and support networks as soon as they can, they’ll wave that think of the children flag and it’ll be too late.

  source

  • pqdinfo@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    We should let a website organize the killing of trans people and not voluntarily, without government action, block the site, because actual governments are planning to ban trans information from the Internet anyway is a hell of a take.

    There is nothing about this that’s going to change what Texas and the US Congress are already planning to do anyway. They’re not going to switch to putting pressure on ISPs to voluntarily ban LGBT information. They’re passing laws to force it.

    But sure, ISPs shouldn’t voluntarily do the right thing because they’re going to be forced to do the wrong thing. That makes sense!

    source

    • Meowoem@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      ‘organize the killing of trans people’

      How far can this hyperbole go?

      source

      • pqdinfo@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I’m beginning to think the support for the EFF’s position here isn’t because of some handwringing “But what should we do, on the one hand…” bullshit from liberals, but “Fuck trans people” from far right wingers who are intentionally lying about what Kiwifarms is doing.

        source

        • -> View More Comments