Australia blocks 4chan, 8chan, Liveleak, others

Twenty Grand · 20-03-2019 02:38AM

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 · 20-03-2019 02:42AM

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 · 20-03-2019 02:43AM

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 · 20-03-2019 02:48AM

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 · 20-03-2019 02:50AM

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 · 20-03-2019 02:53AM

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 · 20-03-2019 03:01AM

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

Twenty Grand · 20-03-2019 03:02AM

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 · 20-03-2019 03:06AM

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 · 20-03-2019 03:12AM

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 ðŸ˜‚

Call Me Jimmy · 20-03-2019 03:13AM

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

Overheal · 20-03-2019 05:12AM

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 · 20-03-2019 05:15AM

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 · 20-03-2019 07:08AM

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.

20-03-2019 07:17AM

"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 · 20-03-2019 07:28AM

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)

20-03-2019 08:01AM

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 · 20-03-2019 08:04AM

we know where you live dude :P

ChikiChiki · 20-03-2019 08:12AM

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 · 20-03-2019 08:27AM

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

Yet, they are still blocked...

markodaly · 20-03-2019 08:35AM

This is basically a shot across the bow to any alternative user based website that has at its heart a community who to create content.

It's fine of course if you are a big corporation with plenty of $$$ behind you, to hire a bunch of expensive lawyers and accountants but for sites with a smaller profile and smaller teams running them, it's not an option.

Governments want to bring these sites into the 'corporate' and regulatory fold, so they can ultimately be controlled, mandated to and coerced.

20-03-2019 09:25AM

[QUOTE=Rubberchikken;109724042.............
[B][B]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[/B].[/B]
censoring the internet/tv isnt going to prevent it either.
there were always racists. there was always hatred. censorship wont fix that.[/QUOTE]

Because instead of mentioning his name, the names that need to be spoken of are those of the victims and their loved ones. He didn't need to be named in the media yesterday - they did:
"At least five victimes were laid to rest on Wednesday at the Memorial Park Cemetery, following the release of the bodies from the coroner's office a day earlier.
Among those being buried were a 15-year-old Syrian refugee Hamza Mustafa and his father, Khalid, 44. They had just arrived in New Zealand six months before they were killed.
Hamza's younger brother Zaed, 13, suffered gunshot wounds to the leg in the attack. He was seen being pushed around in a wheelchair during the ceremony.
Junaid Ismail, 36, and Ashraf Ali, 58, were buried in seperate ceremonies later on Wednesday. The fifth buried victim's name could not be reported"

There will be more funerals in the coming days. Those are the names that should be talked about in the media and by public figures. That is some small way of respecting the victims.
Also, not mentioning his name is about a lot more than respecting the victims. It is about not inspiring other needy narcissists who imagine there own day of glory in the limelight of the media. Yes, there will always be racists but we don't need to help inspire them to "glory"

JohnnyFlash · 20-03-2019 09:42AM

Smacks of self-appointed moral guardians censoring stuff because it makes them feel good and the optics are good.

The first step in the almost impossible task of stopping the internet destroying what it means to be human is to make the huge platforms actually spend some of their profits on fixing what they’ve done to contribute to this mess. The mealy mouthed excuses of arseholes like Zuckerberg who claim the sites are a ‘platform’ and can’t do much about what gets published on their ‘platform’ shouldn’t wash with regulators and government. Take your record profits and fix some of this mess, or else break them up into smaller companies.

20-03-2019 09:52AM

Anyone I've heard of having/sharing the video had it on WhatsApp. It should be banned.
Picking on LiveLeak in particular stuck out hugely. I think I've been on it twice ever (don't have the stomach for it

) but it's an important site.

20-03-2019 10:01AM

I was sent the video from a person in Australia via Facebook messenger and still have it. I haven’t shared it or anything but Facebook messenger are still facilitating the ability to.

Wibbs · 20-03-2019 10:07AM

Twenty Grand wrote: »

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

That was among my first thoughts on the announcement. Having dealt with a couple of players involved here with their understanding of "The Internet", it was their astounding lack thereof that staggered me the most. They were doing what politicians tend to do, that is at their core think "will this make me more popular". As a trait it's dug deep in the DNA and is heavily selected for of pretty any politician that makes it anywhere near the top of a political system. It is not that I automatically distrust politicians and their motives, nor do I think they're playing to the stalls at times like this, but I am always aware that the politician trait is there.

1641 wrote:

Because instead of mentioning his name, the names that need to be spoken of are those of the victims and their loved ones.

I agree. At this moment in time that's exactly how we should act. It's the time to grieve and support those in grief.

But that's the problem with tragic events and our responses to it. Like tragic events in our own personal lives that rattle us as they happen and in the immediate aftermath, tragic events that impact a whole culture do the same thing. And they should.

However when dealing with tragic events in our own lives most outside of that looking in would caution about making rash decisions, even sometimes basic decisions, in the middle of personal grief. It is not the time.

It's the same when wider tragedies affect a society. It is not the time to be making longterm decisions, decisions borne of grief, decisions that we haven't thought through in more sober times with some distance from the grief and certainly not decisions jumped on overnight by politicians, because it seems like a Good Idea™.

This Australian reaction is almost by definition a knee jerk reaction and an uninformed one. There's also a hint of the neighbourhood oulwan keener at funerals about it. Oh look what we're doing, we're doing something, sob sob. Never mind that they went for the low hanging fruit. They didn't go for Facebook who hosted the damned video, oh no. If the Aussie government had blocked Facebook, it would still be a daft knee jerk reaction, but I would have at least respected that stand far more.

Franz Von Peppercorn · 20-03-2019 10:15AM

It is interesting that nothing has been done to FB.

Wibbs · 20-03-2019 10:24AM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

It is interesting that nothing has been done to FB.

Not really F. Always follow the money. Nothing will happen with Google either and you can use them to search for this kinda stuff and more. Ditto for WhatsApp where apparently this video of this horror is being shared. Plus the general public will be grand with censorship of sites they've likely never heard of and think somebody's doing something, but will baulk at not being able to upload their cat pics to their granny on Facebook.

is_that_so · 20-03-2019 10:25AM

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

It is interesting that nothing has been done to FB.

FB supposedly do remove offensive materials. Technically it's WhatsApp/Messenger but banning that is like hitting a peanut with a steam hammer.

Hector Savage · 20-03-2019 10:25AM

yerwanthere123 wrote: »

Good.

Yeah Good .... until it becomes something you value.

Australia blocks 4chan, 8chan, Liveleak, others

Comments