Australia blocks 4chan, 8chan, Liveleak, others

Billy86

It seems to be in response to websites refusing to take down footage of the white supremacist terror attack by an Aussie in New Zealand a few days ago.

A little click baity to say Australia in general, though if I recall from living there a few years back, Telstra essentially control the network. It is unclear which have been blocked as of yet, by other providers.

So far, the self anointed 'as*hole of the internet' (4Chan), it's own as*hole (8Chan), far right social media outlet Voat, far right news outlet Zero Hedge, and Liveleak have been blocked, unclear if others refusing to take down are also coming.

https://amp.9news.com.au/article/128de87c-0fba-4bac-9e14-d3a1cfbbc6d4

Several websites including 4chan have been blocked by major Australian telcos for continuing to host footage of the Christchurch terrorist attack.

Telstra on Tuesday blocked access to 4chan, 8chan and Voat, the blog Zerohedge and video hosting platform Liveleak.

"We understand this may inconvenience some legitimate users of these sites, but these are extreme circumstances and we feel this is the right thing to do," Telstra networks and IT executive Nikos Katinakis said in a statement.

yerwanthere123

Good.

Atlantic Dawn

<Backward Irish TD>Turn off the internet outside office hours, that will fix all this mess for good</Backward Irish TD>

Harry Palmr

No loss really, other than to "basement dwellers". One imagines this is just a maifestation of Australia feeling guilty though. It wouldn't have happened if the killer had been a Kiwi or if this has ocurred on the other side of the world

SEPT 23 1989

That's like hitting a wasps nest with a baseball bat

RWCNT

Looking forward to DS or Auntie Semite or another of the weird far right people that have been infesting AH over the last few months to wade in here decrying this gross act of censorship and affront to muh freeze peach.

If AH ever became a board dedicated to nothing but crypto-fashy memes and a ticking timebomb for radicalising neckbeards Id want it taken down as well. This **** cant be called "just a joke" anymore.

Twenty Grand

RWCNT wrote: »

If AH ever became a board dedicated to nothing but crypto-fashy memes and a ticking timebomb for radicalising neckbeards Id want it taken down as well. This **** cant be called "just a joke" anymore.

Red Dwarf?

Not a fan of this at all.
Sure these sites can refuse to take it down, but there's plenty more on these sites than just that video.
Massive knee jerk response from the Aussies.

Free speech and free expression over any politics of the day.

humberklog

I don't know about the other sites but i'd be annoyed if Livleaks was blocked for me.

Not from my cold dead hands!

RWCNT

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Red Dwarf?

Not a fan of this at all.
Sure these sites can refuse to take it down, but there's plenty more on these sites than just that video.
Massive knee jerk response from the Aussies.

Free speech and free expression over any politics of the day.

Bravo. Shame that your beloved freedom of expression extends to cesspits of fascist propaganda that radicalise young men and cause them to murder people. I applaud your liberal bull**** though all the same, great work.

derfderf

I'm with Telstra. I can access 4chan, but the others are blocked.

end of the road

i would imagine those who would really want to access those websites can get around the block anyway so i don't really see the point tbh.

Twenty Grand

RWCNT wrote: »

Looking forward to DS or Auntie Semite or another of the weird far right people that have been infesting AH over the last few months to wade in here decrying this gross act of censorship and affront to muh freeze peach.

If AH ever became a board dedicated to nothing but crypto-fashy memes and a ticking timebomb for radicalising neckbeards Id want it taken down as well. This **** cant be called "just a joke" anymore.

RWCNT wrote: »

Bravo. Shame that your beloved freedom of expression extends to cesspits of fascist propaganda that radicalise young men and cause them to murder people. I applaud your liberal bull**** though all the same, great work.

So apparently I'm a far right weirdo AND liberal AND fascist for wanting an open internet?
Me thinks you haven't a notion what you're talking about.

Have you even been on any of the sites that have been censored?
Do you know anything about them?

They're far from what you think they are.

Yakult

Easily to be accessed even if banned...

SEPT 23 1989

end of the road wrote: »

i would imagine those who would really want to access those websites can get around the block anyway so i don't really see the point tbh.

Pointless it only gets them more riled up

Gatling

But didn't block them for for hosting other **** including multiple Isis massacre videos.

Franz Von Peppercorn

You’d need to also ban a lot more - the clash of civilisation stuff from American right wingers - to have any effect. Many of these ideologues are feted however.

Canis Lupus

All you need to do is change your DNS to google. It's a two second job or get a VPN.

This is just tokenistic bollix anyway. Annoy a small number of people and be seen to 'be doing something about it' with the minimum effort.

sabat

humberklog wrote: »

I don't know about the other sites but i'd be annoyed if Livleaks was blocked for me.

Not from my cold dead hands!

You'd miss the videos of crazy naked black chicks outside Taco Bells?

markodaly

Whatever way you cut it is censorship. Fine if people agree to it but be careful for what you wish for.
Do you want a Chinese style internet policy, with facial recognition and social credits to boot?

I can never understand why one thinks that banning something fixes a problem.
Drugs like cannabis have been banned for decades, how is that working out for ya?

Suckit

Canis Lupus wrote: »

All you need to do is change your DNS to google. It's a two second job or get a VPN.

Changing DNS not working on some ISPs apparently.

Any idea when Facebook/Instagram will be blocked? Or any of the other cesspools.
Also, I don't think Liveleak were hosting the video.
Or if they were, they deleted it as soon as they realised.
https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=uSQT_1552831454

We've received no small number of complaints regarding the fact we will not carry the video filmed by the psychopath who murdered 49 innocent people in New Zealand, streaming the event live on Facebook. As a result we decided we'd put out a statement explaining why we have taken this stance......

....The Christchurch shooter wasn't just some random “nutcase”. He planned not just the murders but also the chaos he would sow with his manifesto which reads like the fevered dream of a fully fledged “****poster”. Currently, judging by media coverage and reactions online, he's getting almost exactly what he wanted. We don't intend to indulge him further.
The Christchurch shooter wasn't just some random “nutcase”. He planned not just the murders but also the chaos he would sow with his manifesto which reads like the fevered dream of a fully fledged “****poster”. Currently, judging by media coverage and reactions online, he's getting almost exactly what he wanted. We don't intend to indulge him further......

RWCNT

Twenty Grand wrote: »

So apparently I'm a far right weirdo AND liberal AND fascist for wanting an open internet?
Me thinks you haven't a notion what you're talking about.

Have you even been on any of the sites that have been censored?
Do you know anything about them?

They're far from what you think they are.

I never once called you far right or fascist, I was talking about a specific kind of poster that's emerged on AH recently, it's not all about you hun. Your freeze peach chat is pretty liberal, hence why I aimed it directly at you.

Yes, I've seen the sites, and they're exactly what I say they are. Based on your response to my post I dont think your reading comprehension is the best, so unsurprised that you don't agree with me. I know I'm being a bit condescending but I'm speaking the truth. Sorry pal.

Wibbs

end of the road wrote: »

i would imagine those who would really want to access those websites can get around the block anyway so i don't really see the point tbh.

This. The very backbone of the internet as it was designed from the outset basically means it sees censorship as a fault and will try to route around it. And those routes are accessible to anyone with even a modicum of knowledge. This kinda grandstanding gesture will appeal to the narrow of thinking and will work for same and they'll think it's all gone away, but they ignore the fact that the very people it's aimed against will be still reading it, only now out of even more oversight by normal average folks.

bfa1509

RWCNT wrote: »

Looking forward to DS or Auntie Semite or another of the weird far right people that have been infesting AH over the last few months to wade in here decrying this gross act of censorship and affront to muh freeze peach.

If AH ever became a board dedicated to nothing but crypto-fashy memes and a ticking timebomb for radicalising neckbeards Id want it taken down as well. This **** cant be called "just a joke" anymore.

So who do you think has the moral highground to decide what is worthy of being on the internet? Mark Zuckerberg? Jack Dorsey? Barack Obama? Do you think the internet should be managed by a select congregation of your upstanding leftist idols?

RWCNT

Wibbs wrote: »

This. The very backbone of the internet as it was designed from the outset basically means it sees censorship as a fault and will try to route around it. And those routes are accessible to anyone with even a modicum of knowledge. This kinda grandstanding gesture will appeal to the narrow of thinking and will work for same and they'll think it's all gone away, but they ignore the fact that the very people it's aimed against will be still reading it, only now out of even more oversight by normal average folks.

Do you think everyone that reads these forums is a wiz that knows how to get around these blocks? Certainly true for many of them, but definitely not all of them, and I'd venture those that lack the ability are of a significant percentage. I don't think anyone thinks that these measures will make these grubby little spots of the Internet go away forever but as an effort to limit exposure to these sites it will definitely work to an extent, so why not?

Twenty Grand

RWCNT wrote: »

I never once called you far right or fascist, I was talking about a specific kind of poster that's emerged on AH recently, it's not all about you hun. Your freeze peach chat is pretty liberal, hence why I aimed it directly at you.

Yes, I've seen the sites, and they're exactly what I say they are. Based on your response to my post I dont think your reading comprehension is the best, so unsurprised that you don't agree with me. I know I'm being a bit condescending but I'm speaking the truth. Sorry pal.

I think you've a hard time reading your own misspelled barely comprehensible bullsh*t.

Apparently I'm far right and also liberal for supporting a "freeze peach" and open internet?
Ya pull the other one pal. Looks like you've found a dictionary of cool internet political terms and you're keen to show us how smart you are by throwing a few big words out there.

Also you've "seen" 4chan?
You've "seen" liveleak?
That's like saying you've seen Reddit or you've seen Youtube.

Wanting to ban these websites because you don't like one aspect is like wanting to ban music because you don't like a song.

This move is so knee jerk, idiotic, and ill thought out I'm surprised it didn't have Sean Sherlock's name attached.

RWCNT

bfa1509 wrote: »

So who do you think has the moral highground to decide what is worthy of being on the internet? Mark Zuckerberg? Jack Dorsey? Barack Obama? Do you think the internet should be managed by a select congregation of your upstanding leftist idols?

The fact you seem to think the people you've named are even leftist tells me everything I need to know about your level of political literacy, so I'm apprehensive of trying to enter into dialogue with you. I said nothing about what should or should not be on the internet, but I applaud NZ for trying to divert traffic from boards which recently radicalised a man that killed 50 odd people. If you value muh freeze peach on the interwebs over that turn maybe it's time to re-adjust the old moral compass? Just a thought, sweetheart.

Billy86

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Free speech and free expression over any politics of the day.

My girlfriend is banned from 4chan (don't even ask!), so it appears they're not so hot on free speech themselves.

Twenty Grand

RWCNT wrote: »

The fact you seem to think the people you've named are even leftist tells me everything I need to know about your level of political literacy, so I'm apprehensive of trying to enter into dialogue with you. I said nothing about what should or should not be on the internet, but I applaud NZ for trying to divert traffic from boards which recently radicalised a man that killed 50 odd people. If you value muh freeze peach on the interwebs over that turn maybe it's time to re-adjust the old moral compass? Just a thought, sweetheart.

He didn't say they were leftist. You need to pay more attention. Maybe it's past your bedtime sweetheart?

Billy86 wrote: »

My girlfriend is banned from 4chan (don't even ask!), so it appears they're not so hot on free speech themselves.

Ah you can't tease us, spill!

There's a difference between 4chan banning one account from posting and an ISP banning many sites.

Rubberchikken

if someone doesnt want to view that video then dont. ive never been on social media so havent seen nor will ever see the video and ill survive.
this man choose to do what he did. others did before him and im guessing but others will in the future.
not mentioning his name like that lameass pm in NZ has been going on about isnt going to lessen the pain caused to family members of the dead and its not going to stop it ever happening again.
censoring the internet/tv isnt going to prevent it either.
there were always racists. there was always hatred. censorship wont fix that.

RWCNT

Twenty Grand wrote: »

I think you've a hard time reading your own misspelled barely comprehensible bullsh*t.

Apparently I'm far right and also liberal for supporting a "freeze peach" and open internet?
Ya pull the other one pal. Looks like you've found a dictionary of cool internet political terms and you're keen to show us how smart you are by throwing a few big words out there.

Also you've "seen" 4chan?
You've "seen" liveleak?
That's like saying you've seen Reddit or you've seen Youtube.

Wanting to ban these websites because you don't like one aspect is like wanting to ban music because you don't like a song.

This move is so knee jerk, idiotic, and ill thought out I'm surprised it didn't have Sean Sherlock's name attached.

Why do you insist on saying that I think you're far right? I've said no such thing. Apologies for any spelling mistakes, but you must be correct in asserting that my posts are incomprehensible as you demonstrably can't grasp the point of what I'm saying. I'm satisfied that i put a reasonable case across, so tough titty for you I guess. Sorry my big words upset you. Also, I never said a thing about banning anything from the internet. Terrible. Take a lap.

Billy86

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Ah you can't tease us, spill!

I wish I could but let's say it caused a hell of a lot of problems!

There's a difference between 4chan banning one account from posting and an ISP banning many sites.

But if it's all about free speech, why is the free speech of a company deemed more important than the free speech of an actual person?

Twenty Grand

RWCNT wrote: »

Why do you insist on saying that I think you're far right? I've said no such thing. .... Also, I never said a thing about banning anything from the internet. Terrible. Take a lap.

Well you did post this about people who want free speech?

RWCNT wrote: »

Looking forward to... another of the weird far right people that have been...decrying this gross act of censorship and affront to muh freeze peach.

Sooo, where am I going wrong?

RWCNT wrote: »

If AH ever became a board dedicated to nothing but crypto-fashy memes and a ticking timebomb for radicalising neckbeards Id want it taken down as well. This **** cant be called "just a joke" anymore.

Never said anything about wanting anything banned?

Also can we PLEASE address the Red Dwarf reference

RWCNT

Twenty Grand wrote: »

He didn't say they were leftist. You need to pay more attention. Maybe it's past your bedtime sweetheart?

Oh, of course. He just named a few randomers then immediately asked me if I think the content of the Internet should be moderated by a group of my upstanding leftist heroes. No reasonable person would take that to mean he was suggesting those named were my "leftist heroes". Basic conversational comprehension at work here, pet. I think you're the one that needs your bed.

markodaly

Wibbs wrote: »

This. The very backbone of the internet as it was designed from the outset basically means it sees censorship as a fault and will try to route around it. And those routes are accessible to anyone with even a modicum of knowledge. This kinda grandstanding gesture will appeal to the narrow of thinking and will work for same and they'll think it's all gone away, but they ignore the fact that the very people it's aimed against will be still reading it, only now out of even more oversight by normal average folks.

100% that this is grandstanding.

https://twitter.com/Telstra_news/status/1107526963583844353?s=09

I wonder if they have the balls to block Facebook, the origin of the video in question?

It all stinks, and ironically exactly what the shooter would have wanted!

Twenty Grand

RWCNT wrote: »

Oh, of course. He just named a few randomers then immediately asked me if I think the content of the Internet should be moderated by a group of my upstanding leftist heroes. No reasonable person would take that to mean he was suggesting those named were my "leftist heroes". Basic conversational comprehension at work here, pet. I think you're the one that needs your bed.

If you're such a fan of censorship then can you please be quiet. The adults are speaking.

RWCNT

Twenty Grand wrote: »

If you're such a fan of censorship then can you please be quiet. The adults are speaking.

Meeeow, excellent facts and logic pal,while avoiding responding to the actual points I made that challenged your scutter chat. You're a fantastic debater I must say.

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Well you did post this about people who want free speech?

Sooo, where am I going wrong?


Never said anything about wanting anything banned?

Also can we PLEASE address the Red Dwarf reference

For the last time, I'm referring to a specific kind of AH poster. Those that enjoy discussing the great replacement and the kalergi plan. I've named two specifically. I can't for the life of me recall a single post you've made before on this forum, so I'm not talking about you. Is that OK? I don't want you to feel I'm bullying you.

I clearly have a different idea of what free speech means than you do. Which, by the way, is the usual kind of free speech, in that I don't want the government to be able to imprison you or confiscate your property for speaking your beliefs. I do support the right of the government to limit traffic to cesspools that radicalize people and cause them to murder people.

Yes, I would LIKE for **** like that to be taken down and removed. However, I know that it's practically impossible for reasons explained by the erudite Wibbs, and such I support efforts that limit its exposure. As I'd rather more Muslims weren't shot dead in a mosque. I make no apologies for that whatsoever.

And lightening up now, I havnt watched much red dwarf, maybe like two episodes, link to the joke you're referencing? I love Craig Charles so I hope it's one of his lines.

markodaly

Billy86 wrote: »

But if it's all about free speech, why is the free speech of a company deemed more important than the free speech of an actual person?

Think of it like a newspaper.
A newspaper is (normally) privately owned and will follow an editorial line. No newspaper has to print a letter or an article from every crank or malcontent. They reserve the right to what they publish.

However, no one has the right to stop you buying whatever newspaper you wish, nor has the state the right to tell what journalists to write in these newspapers.

This ban is like the former. It is stopping people from going to these sites, even if the content they want to view is non-offensive.

There is a reason why if you go to China and type 'Tiananmen square' you will get a very different result than say someone doing the same search.
This is the end result, and its a terrifying prospect for freedom and liberal values of free speech, warts, and all that these sites may host some despicable content.

rapul

Thanks for posting the image above, interesting to see the difference.

Twenty Grand

RWCNT wrote: »

If AH ever became a board dedicated to nothing but crypto-fashy memes

Crypto fascist is a term that appeared in a few political texts in the past, but it was made popular by Red Dwarf.

Young Lister: But I'm not into dosh, I hate money, I loathe possessions, It's just so... crypto-fascist.
Lister: Will you stop saying everything's crypto-fascist? You make me sound like I was a complete git!

It's just a popular label that's thrown around by people who either have no idea what it means or have ascribe a different meaning that someone else who uses the same term. Same as most labels used online, left, right, liberal, alt, new, etc etc.

Calhoun

Wibbs wrote: »

This. The very backbone of the internet as it was designed from the outset basically means it sees censorship as a fault and will try to route around it. And those routes are accessible to anyone with even a modicum of knowledge. This kinda grandstanding gesture will appeal to the narrow of thinking and will work for same and they'll think it's all gone away, but they ignore the fact that the very people it's aimed against will be still reading it, only now out of even more oversight by normal average folks.

In a sense it will force the internet back into what it was a place that wasn't as main stream you will have the normal clean version and then dig a little deeper and there will always be places where free speech will happen.

Meanwhile it will give solace to the narrow-minded left aligned plebs as the reee themselves to sleep content that they are getting closer to the echo chamber were they only consume right type of thinking.

RWCNT

Twenty Grand wrote: »

Crypto fascist is a term that appeared in a few political texts in the past, but it was made popular by Red Dwarf.


It's just a popular label that's thrown around by people who either have no idea what it means or have ascribe a different meaning that someone else who uses the same term. Same as most labels used online, left, right, liberal, alt, new, etc etc.

Never knew the term was popularised by red dwarf! I wouldn't even think it could accurately be called popular, I certainly don't see it around very much. Its pretty obvious what it means = sneaky fascist. I do get quite weary of the labels alt-right, new atheist etc. Liberal has to be most misused political term of them all at the minute, which frustrates me to no end.

Craig Charles DJs a funk and soul night where I live in Manchester semi regularly. My friend who's a massive Red Dwarf fan approached him to tell him what a great fan he was, but was so nervous that he just blurted out "I loved Robot Wars mate!!". Craig told my mate to **** off 😂

Call Me Jimmy

Facebook only went and broadcast it live, can't be cutting them off for that!

Overheal

markodaly wrote: »

100% that this is grandstanding.

https://twitter.com/Telstra_news/status/1107526963583844353?s=09

I wonder if they have the balls to block Facebook, the origin of the video in question?

It all stinks, and ironically exactly what the shooter would have wanted!

That’s missing the point: the sites in question are still hosting the video. Facebook removed it. It’s not being done in the guise of a punishment it’s being done to limit the casual exposure of the video.

Overheal

RWCNT wrote: »

Never knew the term was popularised by red dwarf! I wouldn't even think it could accurately be called popular, I certainly don't see it around very much. Its pretty obvious what it means = sneaky fascist. I do get quite weary of the labels alt-right, new atheist etc. Liberal has to be most misused political term of them all at the minute, which frustrates me to no end.

...

Bravo. Shame that your beloved freedom of expression extends to cesspits of fascist propaganda that radicalise young men and cause them to murder people. I applaud your liberal bull**** though all the same, great work.

Weary you say

markodaly

Overheal wrote: »

That’s missing the point: the sites in question are still hosting the video. Facebook removed it. It’s not being done in the guise of a punishment it’s being done to limit the casual exposure of the video.

That is not correct.

One site that was blocked was zerohedge.com, hardly an outpost of the far-right.
Apparently, the video was linked in a few comments, but the comments were removed. The video was never hosted on that site, yet was still blocked.

Liveleak did host the video for a few hours until it was taken down. This was on Friday, yet Tuesday night, they go off and block the website regardless.

Facebook though get a free pass? Yet we all know why.

"Who cares if someone I don't like gets removed from sites I use? They can user other sites. Also, let's ban those sites."

suicide_circus

Here's a list of the countries with the most amount of internet censorship

https://www.le-vpn.com/top-10-censors-internet-avoid-internet-censorship/

its a who's who of places you dont wanna live (unless youre a rich westerner in some cases)

suicide_circus

suicide_circus wrote: »

Here's a list of the countries with the most amount of internet censorship

https://www.le-vpn.com/top-10-censors-internet-avoid-internet-censorship/

its a who's who of places you dont wanna live (unless youre a rich westerner in some cases)

I live in one of those. BBC blocked most of the time.

People on here think society will never change, and they think they'll never change. The idea that their views could be censored doesn't enter their minds.

Soon, they'll be supporting the removal of net neutrality because that will be argued for as a way to combat hate speech online.

suicide_circus

we know where you live dude :P

ChikiChiki

Despite having a savage quality of life Australia compensates for that by being the ultimate nanny state. There a laws and rules for everything. This is ironic for a country founded by convicts.

markodaly

https://twitter.com/HaydenHewitt/status/1107998697789550594

Yet, they are still blocked...