SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The "Daily Stormer", a neo-Nazi website that has been having trouble staying online since Charlottesville, has once again been shutdown.
According to The Verge:
The neo-Nazi site Daily Stormer briefly returned to the web today, using a new URL and a string of new hosts to dodge the bans that took it off the internet last week. The site reappeared this morning at the address Punished-stormer.com, apparently using Dreamhost as both a host and DNS provider.
[note: url modified]
Shortly after the new site became public, Anonymous groups began a denial-of-service attack against it, targeting the Dreamhost DNS infrastructure that makes the site accessible to the rest of the web. The result was nearly two hours of intermittent downtime for the countless sites using Dreamhost's DNS infrastructure.
In WWII, things like this were called "collateral damage", where innocent casualties were necessary in order to get at the Nazis themselves. But is this sort of action legitimate on the internet? Especially by non-governmental organizations?
Also reported at https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2017/08/dreamhost-ddos-attack/
Related story: https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/21/16180614/charlottesville-daily-stormer-alt-right-internet-domain
(Score: 2) by FakeBeldin on Sunday August 27 2017, @10:40AM (4 children)
Have you heard of the Paradox of tolerance [wikipedia.org]? That raises questions concerning (a.o.) free speech which you seem to dismiss out of hand. Then again, as the article points out: the EU and the USA have quite a different approach how to deal with this paradox practically when it comes to hate speech. And given how the EU != USA, maybe the values of the inhabitants can be allowed to diverge on some points.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday August 27 2017, @12:39PM (2 children)
And what would those questions be? This is an excuse to crack down on people with the wrong ideas. And let us note here that no one has actually found a problem with free speech due to what speech is tolerated.
My view is that an absolute right on free speech is essential to a democracy and the EU will demonstrate the reason why over the next few decades as it veers away from democracy. Intolerance of nasty, unpopular stuff now will evolve into intolerance of anything that threatens the powers-that-be.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 27 2017, @02:44PM (1 child)
The aspects of democracy in the US have been subverted quite heavily, but I guess your fervant patriotism has blinded you. Nine eleven was the excuse that let them hammer the nails into our coffins.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday August 28 2017, @12:12AM
That's a bizarre argument to make. Democracy is in decline (which apparently is a bad thing, right?). So we need to take away freedom of speech to...?
Not seeing how this is supposed to reverse the decline of democracy. But I can see plenty of ways it can destroy democracy altogether.
(Score: 3, Informative) by fyngyrz on Sunday August 27 2017, @01:33PM
I do dismiss them out of hand. From your cite:
In the context of free speech, that assumes that allowing speech means we are not prepared to defend a tolerate society from action (this is implicit in the phrase "unlimited tolerance.) Which is nonsensical. Of course we are. Speech will not destroy the tolerant; only action can do that. US society is invested in letting a person speak, and then speaking right back to them in a contrary manner when that is called for, and taking action when that is called for, which is specifically when intolerant action raises its head.
Having said that, there's no 100% good on either side of the free-speech/repression dichotomy; but the good on the side of free speech far outweighs the goods of repression of same; conversely, the evils of repression far outweigh the evils of free speech.
The EU is doing it wrong. Hell, the US is also doing it wrong... but we're doing it a good bit better, anyway.