
Daily Stormer Moves from GoDaddy to Google - betafive
https://domains.google.com/registrar?s=dailystormer.com#w=dailystormer.com&chp=w
======
tdurden
Google just kicked them off for violating TOS as well.

~~~
betafive
Good.

~~~
Clubber
Not really. I don't care for what they say, but it's important that they have
the ability to say it. It's concerning that private companies, through
registrars have the ability to erase viewpoints from the public internet. More
signs that the internet be treated as a right.

I liken the internet to press. Most of it sucks, but having it and being able
to freely speak through it, is essential to liberty.

I mean, if we as a society don't believe people like this should have a free
internet like everyone else, we deserve the closed internet we will get.
Freedom sucks because you have to listen to a lot of assholes, but it's much
better than the alternative.

~~~
betafive
They can still say whatever they like, and, y'know what? Their fascist readers
can even still get to it using their IP address-- at least, they could if they
weren't hiding it behind CloudFlare.

This isn't censorship. As far as I know, no one has the "right" to an entry in
the public DNS, nor is any registrar required to do business with Nazis.
Registrars have the right to free association and speech too.

~~~
Clubber
Then no one has the right to a free and public internet. The experiment
failed.

~~~
yflu
Can they not simply self-host?

But besides that, my understanding is that though the internet is free, the
various entities on the internet are equally free to refuse service. After
all, if they were otherwise obligated, that would imply X's freedom can
override Y's freedom, which also contradicts the nebulous ideal of freedom.

------
dfps
They being the domain registrar (edit thx betafive) for the domain (they
already didn't host the content). Also, this followed hacking and threats:

...

(CNN)The Daily Stormer, a white supremacist and neo-Nazi website, needs to
find another domain name provider after GoDaddy gave it the boot following a
derogatory story about the woman killed at the Charlottesville, Virginia,
rally.

The site, which calls itself "The World's Most Genocidal Republican Website,"
registered its name with GoDaddy -- but GoDaddy doesn't host the Daily
Stormer's content.

...

(Guardian)A message purportedly posted by hackers has appeared on the Daily
Stormer, a neo-Nazi website, saying the site has been taken over in response
to an article criticising a woman who died during violence at far-right rally
in Virginia over the weekend.

...

What I'm curious about is Google. Are they providing hosting and domain
serving for anybody (even unpopular speech)? Where does content go when
companies refuse to work with publishers?

~~~
betafive
Google has replaced GoDaddy as the registrar. Afaict, the domain continues to
be hosted by/through CloudFlare, as it has been for several years.

The "hack" is fake.

~~~
dfps
So is Google now a more reliable/bulletproof registrar? I think I've heard
CloudFlare will not take refuse anything

~~~
betafive
Tbh, I doubt Google knows they're the Stormers' registrar yet; you can
transfer domains automatically.

CloudFlare doesn't provide hosting, it's a reverse proxy. But, if you believe
[http://www.crimeflare.com/cfs.html](http://www.crimeflare.com/cfs.html), the
actual web server sitting behind dailystormer.com is hosted by online.net, of
France.

~~~
dfps
Right. I use CF. I just meant that there has been criticism aimed at CF for
'protecting' (providing service to) unpopular speech (even harmful stuff like
IS), and I think I read they were unwilling to refuse service to anybody.

France, hey? I've actually heard France is competitive with US when it comes
to internet and free speech. Do you think that's true? I wonder which country
most protects speech on the internet?

~~~
betafive
It is illegal to promote ethnic hatred or deny the Holocaust in France, so...

~~~
dfps
Is there any country that protects all speech that you know of?

(Related to the law you mentioned, in Germany they also have laws that are
reactions to WWII, and they arrested some Chinese tourists for making Nazi
salutes for tourist photos outside a government building last week.)

~~~
betafive
Protecting speech is often in tension with other individual liberties that are
supposed to be protected, and the purpose of government is to arbitrate those
disputes. I don't think there are any that grant unfettered protection to
speech-- a government that permitted advocation of treason, for instance,
probably wouldn't last very long.

~~~
dfps
It is definitely possible to have complete protection of speech. It's a
choice, and the repercussions of it would not involve great harm, although
since the 1950s we seem to be getting closer (and sometimes further).

Treason is only possible if a country is at war (ie has an "enemy"). The
speech would be protected as it is now (that wouldn't be the crime they
break), but they could be found guilty of committing treason by the same
(speech in this case) act.

------
patrickg_zill
"The answer to speech you don't agree with, is more speech."

------
interstitial
Ah, who took the "hacker" out of hacker news? Would you rather have the
stormfront members speaking openly, or getting more educated about the dark
web, where they'll be forced to go? I prefer they stay as unsophisticated as
possible, openly hosted at godaddy. It's not a false dichotomy. Taking away
their hosting is not going to end their site or community. Though it does
allow, risk-free opportunity to virtue signal on your favorite platform.

~~~
nthcolumn
He may be many things but weev is not stupid. He knows enough already.
Security through obscurity never works. I fully expected him to move his shit
to the company in Ukraine he works for now. Maybe having to move their base
around will leave a trail. Ultimately we want actual hands on these douche
bags.

