Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Complaint filed against Hurricane Electric for blocking site (twitter.com/incognetllc)
10 points by heartbeats 7 months ago | hide | past | favorite | 12 comments

All power to them.

This is a dangerous moment in internet history. The line between its destruction, at the VERY LEAST in principle, and continued existence is in the air.. And all most people can think about is how much they don't like what a bunch of people post in their own little corner of the net.

Like other users have pointed out, this tweet is from the provider that kiwifarms was using.

For those who aren't aware, kiwifarms is a website that was ostensibly a gossip forum, but in practice often ended up being used for cyberstalking and harassment. They would frequently harass and doxx people. Their wikipedia page covers parts of it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiwi_Farms

Their, now banned, official twitter page said their goal was “exploitation of the mentally handicapped for amusement purposes”. ( Source: https://archive.is/jYp5p ).

I think Kiwifarms is (borderline) criminal. Null, the admin of the site, outright said he was ok with users posting stolen financial information, such as Social Security Numbers and Credit cards. Source: https://archive.is/0fOcS . There are many examples of this

I would describe them as operating with a paper thin layer of "plausible" deniability. Officially you aren't allowed to harass or interact with the targets. But posting their home address, stolen passwords, phone numbers, and information about relatives is all allowed.

But even the rule against interacting with "lolcows" (called "cowtipping") is haphazardly enforced. For example, one user had sex with a "lolcow" and posted photos. The admin explicitly said they would allow the content to remain up: https://archive.is/zYnpK#35%

Full text of tweet:

> Today we filed an official complaint against @henet (Hurricane Electric) with the @AGOWA (Attorney General of Washington State) over their censorship of legal and protected speech. We have also reached out to the @EFF who has previously shown support in protecting the foundation of free speech on the internet.

> Free speech is for everyone, even those you disagree with. Dropping routes to a subnet in the middle of the night with no notice and with no prior complaints or concerns expressed is not a way to do business. Under Washington State House Bill 2282, ISPs may not "Block lawful content"

The speech concerned is the hosting of the website Kiwi Farms. Their statement:


Kiwi Farms has a body count. Because of its tolerance of hate, cyberbullying, and doxxing that has resulted in at least three deaths, it cannot be considered "lawful content".

No, it actually doesn't. The only person who even casually mentions KF, can't even be confirmed dead. Only hearsay through a friend of a friend etc.

Even ignoring the deaths, there are a number of other issues created by the site. See my other comments in this thread, for instance.

can you elaborate on those three people that supposedly indirectly died because of a forum?

He won't, but this article does [0]. It was written by an unbiased third party of KF and has a section that goes into detail about the three people that supposedly died by the hands of KF. The TL;DR is that two of them had other reasons for their death, and it's pretty reasonable (and morally correct) to assume KF had nothing to do with their demise.

The third one, Byuu, is a bit more nuanced. From all the information that is publicly available about the incident, there has been zero primary sources that confirm or deny their death. All headlines that I could find cite USAtoday their source, whose only source is a man named Hector Martin, who essentially just said "trust me bro" on twitter. The most concrete evidence to Byuu's death is a single picture of an urn that was taken and posted months after the fact, supposedly taken by their former employer who was living in a completely different country at the time.

[0] https://destinygg.substack.com/p/keffals-a-case-study-on-int...


I can't even tell if this comment is pure biting satire, especially on account of the last sentence. Or if it is meant to be taken at face value.

Like it or not, Liz has a lot of influence in the network infrastructure community, and her methods are effective. Thanks largely to her efforts, the internet as a whole plays by new rules, and cannot be assumed to be politically neutral.

The main reason he's targeting this site is because its users archived evidence of his sex crimes.

He's not doing this for any grand moral reason, it's driven primarily by self-interest.

Is this really good satire or a really bad uninformed take?

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact