In a free society business owners do whatever they want. That includes hosting content that runs counter to government positions, and the right to NOT HOST content they disagree with (for whatever reason, even financial or publicity-related reasons).
In Putin's Russia, organizations are forced to carry content they don't agree with, or they are prohibited.
That's not an exaggeration. If the government says you must publish an article about how awesome a new airplane or how righteous the orthodox church is, or how bad the evil Ukrainians are, you must do so.
Many free speech morons think that organizations should be forced to carry messages they disagree with... because freedom.
Freedom is being able to tell someone to fuck off.
Freedom is also having to deal with the consequences from the public if you tell the wrong person to fuck off or you don't tell a deserving person to fuck off.
What the free speech morons are proposing is so much worse than what we have now that the terror it could cause would be inconceivable, unless you're an anti-government journalist in Russia, of course. It's not inconceivable, it's your Monday.
It is so charming to see all of the fReE mArKeT lovers on HN twist themselves into pretzels when it comes to things like this.
It's not a hard concept but the free speech morons seem incapable of understanding it.
If the free speech morons had their way HN would be powerless to stop me from posting the addresses and phone numbers of people I disagree with.
I touched on this somewhere else in the thread, but it is not uncommon for companies to end up in a position where they have so much control over society that they need to be limited in their power, else they just hold too much power and that is not good in the long term.
Something like cloudflare, where their decision to host or not host you can be the difference between being able to be online and not, needs to be regulated as a utility because executives at cloudflare should not have the authority to determine who can and cannot host a website on the internet.
Mob rule is not good, and mob rule will lead to oppression of some form if left alone for long enough.
There is no exception to that rule, it is only a matter of time before it happens.
There should be reasonable restrictions on behavior based on harm, but those restrictions should not be in the hands of mob rule or companies like cloudflare. Those restrictions should be based on rule of law and determined in a courtroom with informed jurors and a fair trial.
There are times where that is excessive, this is not one of them because cloudflare is such an important piece of infrastructure. For a private form? You can delete whatever the heck you want, you should be able to.
Something like cloud flare, however, is more of a utility. Giving it the power to shut people off is giving it too much power.
No, but I feel like the ideology of the person posting this misses the fact that they are on the side of what empowers people like Putin.
Kiwi farms is clearly an issue that needs to be handled, but in my mind to handle it requires you be hesitant, it requires you be reluctant to shut them down because you don't want to step over that line. It means setting up barriers to your authority to shut other people down.
This, what I see here, is a glee for it. It's loarding your power over others, it's enacting revenge.
That is the toxicity I see. Pragmatic handling of speech requires that you sometimes shut down bad actors, but when the people in charge are doing it without concern, or the people driving it or using unchecked forces to do it, that's an issue.
I do not believe that there is any connection between the presence of KF and the ability of states to crush oppressed groups. States are not actually bound by their principles and they regularly break those principles to attack minority groups that they do not like. Whether people are gleeful, dispassionate, or upset about Cloudflare stopping business with a forum whose purpose is largely to harass people has zero influence on future defenses that various oppressed groups must make against oppressive regimes.
But you were talking about fascist nations, not civil society. Defenestration seems to have more impact that deplatforming in such places. Russian police also have no issue with arresting people for holding completely blank sign, on the basis that the medium (a sign on which a message of protest could be included) is a sufficiently message-like reason to take someone off the street. Mind you, the same is true of the US to some extent.
