New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I thought you were done making new accounts? You know who this is @raindog308 @FAT32.
>everyone is some boogeymanWeak. Nice DDoS to my OVH servers.
Tested it on yourself first? That's cool.
No, someone is DDoSing me over IRC drama. I think it's @dahartigan or @dosai. They have a bunch of KS dedis, so it'd make sense.
Got hit by it tonight. Took down ns1 but that wasn't really hard.
Jesus dude
Seek help my friend.
Deflection. I know you're from India. You were banned from rizon back in 2015, to set a point.
Ken same here. I'm telling you these guys are
Poor josh. Yeah, hope he gets DDoS protection soon. I moved the BNC, so they should hopefully stop after some time.
Stop spreading hatespeech
If its flokinet, they are bragging about it on twitter. They are everything but "freedom of speech":
I'll bite:
Oh well, Russia just happens to be by far the largest european (but not EU) country, so yes I guess Russia can be called eastern Europe.
As for their laws, they are a bit picky/bureaucratic with data (not unlike e.g. Germany) and it might be unwise to host an obviously hateful anti-Putin or anti-Russia or plain criminal site there but I've never had a single freedom of speech problem there (not even with occasional anti-Putin opinions expressed (reflected opinions, not pure hatred). Hell, we are talking about a country that even gave public money to the pussy riot pervert abomination.
As for the USA and EU my take is very similar to @Francisco's and @MannDude's. It's really sad and was different but nowadays the USA indeed seems to be much more liberal (in the original and good sense) than EU-rope.
I'd add however the advice to preferably look at countries who at least do don't easily bend over for facebook, twitter and other dictatorial large corporations because, I agree with Francisco, increasingly often it's not LEA knocking but woke (not at all) "liberals" trying to force their ideology and showing zero tolerance for lack of blind obedience.
Good job, Flokinet was always recognized from being "Freedom of Speech" to be honest, I appreciate that. But when they say "freedom of speech" and doesn't allow "vaccines desinformation"
Something is wrong here, you can believe on that. Flokinet fired a brilliant shot in the foot as an advocate of free speech by banning such a subject (Vaccines)
Yes, is legal. But of course always will have someone who will disagree with you, then you will receive pressure from organizations etc.
Your host seems a good to go.
Thank you
Flokinet unfortunately, like others said they aren't freedom of speech.. since they always defended freedom of speech and the right of different opinion. I can't understand this position of them.. BuyVM and Alexhost seems a good to go, but US seems to be better.
Never heard before. What happens if against trump and I'm the in same hosting like him? They will suspend me or Trump? Curious.
Regardless of what people may believe about vaccines, if you aren’t a doctor you shouldn’t be publishing information about it which could potentially mislead people. While doctors could also (and have before) spread misinformation, it’s much less likely.
Getting a vaccine is a matter of life and death. I’ve watched relatives of mine die of COVID first hand.
Let me ask you this: would you take down a website made by someone who has no medical background, saying vaccines are bad and to take some random pills instead? ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/08/24/how-rights-ivermectin-conspiracy-theories-led-people-buying-horse-dewormer/ )
If you wouldn’t, then I would personally never use your product. Allowing people to be put in dangers way in the name of “muh freedom of speech” is irresponsible, and not freedom of speech
I support freedom of speech, but I don’t support misinformation that misleads people to possibly harm themselves. There is a clear difference between allowing misinformation or allowing freedom of speech. If you understood what freedom of speech is, you would know this, but you clearly don’t.
Advertise yourself as a host who doesn’t care about what people say instead, and not one that stands for “freedom of speech”. That would be more accurate as to what you seem to be offering.
Regards
Doesn't stop you from getting it. Doesn't stop you from spreading it. Doesn't stop you from dying from it. Allegedly reduces the chances of you dying from it.
Those are the facts and simultaneously "misinformation" so maybe dial it down a bit there Karen. I've lost people to COVID-19 too. I'm still waiting for a vaccine. I locked down before it was cool and distributed homemade masks when supplies ran low. COVID-19 is real, it's killing people that wouldn't have otherwise died now, and the vaccine is also shit that I'm surprised anyone can pretend to be impressed by. I'm convinced the whole thing was just Trump promising them that if they rushed it, we wouldn't let them lose money on it, but that's less fact and more opinion.
Sorry if I appear as a “Karen” to you, but I personally feel that it’s completely justifiable to condemn spreading misinformation, especially when it has a real life affect on people.
When it comes to peoples health and well-being you shouldn’t be trusting strangers on the internet. Sadly some people aren’t smart enough to understand that. (People always getting scammed, people ordering counterfeit items thinking they’re real, the list goes on and on for how people fall for misinformation)
Feel free to answer my question in my initial post if you wish. I’m curious to see what your answer would be and your reasoning as to why.
Regards
Edit: thanks for editing your post, I fully understand your perspective on the issue.
Of course not, …. unless there is a legal argument / TOS that can be used
Just… keep in mind, what the laws are in a country and what a host decides to do isn’t often the same.
A host is an independent business - they could yank you just because they don’t like your email address and the best you can hope for is a refund. They probably won’t because money, but that doesn’t mean they won’t and it doesn’t mean they won’t amend a TOS if needed.
The problem is that influential misinformation campaigns are NOT in the same fucking universe as "discussions". It's ridiculous to frame it as intelligent discussion.
We have countries making it illegal to encourage and advise someone to commit suicide. How much of a stretch is it if someone posts to drink bleach or take some drugs because they're fucking idiots who don't care if people die as a result? Or to advise someone to make wrong or poor medical decisions?
When Supreme Court is trying to figure out what's cool and what isn't, they do need to take into account the benefit and safety of the public.
Individual choice. If an individual reads "drink bleach" and they do, that's just natural selection. I'd rather publish a million damaging opinions than accidentally censor the truth just once, and that's what it's really looking like. Twitter banned people for misinformation on Hunter Biden's laptop and yet, it was all true. It brings the question "Who deserves to be the judge of truth?" In your house fine, but demanding that someone else be the judge of truth in their house is an overreach.
And if you judge truth in your house, it's a dick move to say it's a house of free speech. Just like hostballs isn't a free speech site, and isn't marked as such. I have many houses, that one isn't free speech.
Just remember that if you censor a thousand lies and one truth, a ton of people are going to assume the previous thousand were also truths. And that isn't damaging? Your one mistake will be equivalent to saying "drink bleach" because you were proven to be a bad judge of truth. And it will happen. That's where we are today, all questioning the value of the censors because they keep getting it wrong enough to call all of their decisions into question, and that's why you look around and see an exceptional number of what you'd call conspiracy theorists. They've been legitimized more than ever, by the people who were trying to do the opposite.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. It isn't enough to have a justifiable cause, especially if you cause the exact opposite of your intent. Results matter, and it barely takes looking out the window to see the results of the growing efforts to suppress misinformation. Is it working or have you only amplified the voices you think should be suppressed? Look around, do you see more or less anti-vaxxers than you did 3 years ago? They have billboards now for Christ's sake, the more you silence them the louder they get.
If we can't teach people to make good decisions then we're not raising a generation capable of carrying on a legacy of deciding what is true. At best, it's unsustainable. At worst, and more likely, it's dangerous. If you don't want Hunger Games to be a documentary, stop letting billionaires decide the truth and start raising your damn kids. It didn't work when right wingers burned books and censored music, it ain't gonna work this time. They even blamed Columbine on Marilyn Manson and the Red Hot Chili Peppers. Did that work either? Nope. The people they tried to censor created their own subculture and grew up to be...censors. Just like the people before them, it'll be their undoing.
This concludes my toilet chat.
except of course what you believe ...
Any and every information has the potential to mislead people.
Uhum, There are plenty doctors and even professors in both camps. So, on which data basis do you assert that doctors spreading misinformation is less likely?
You mean as in "I'm a doctor and qualified and I examined all relevant factors as well as the corpse myself"? Or as in "the official death certificate had 'covid' written on it so that must be the cause"? Or maybe just as in "Someone told me so".
And what about those cases where people allege that one of their relatives dies due to the vaccine? Let me guess, those are "spreaders of misinformation" ...
You mean if I were the provider of that person? My answer is: No, I definjtely would not - two main reasons, (a) a provider is not a judge just like there are things to be done by bakers and not by crane operators, (b) I'm not a fascist and I don't like to act as one.
As a provider one has the task to host, as long as it's legal. Period.
That's your free choice - and unlike you I do respect the choices people make.
Yet more moral judging. Short version of what you actually mean is "If you happen to have the same view as me, welcome, publish it, but if your view is not even close to mine than you are declared [insert negative tag] and shall be suppressed".
Sorry, I forgot. Of bloody course people disagreeing with your view are stupid too.
You sound and look like someone with very little in terms of facts who compensates that lack by condemnation, moral missionizing, etc.
At the end of the day it's simple: We oh so evil people don't censor you and don't keep you away from getting as many jabs as you like - while you of so good and righteous people censor us and even increasingly try to force us to act according to their views.
Actually, that’s not exactly true. Anti-vaxxers here have shutdown quite a bit of our hospitals with protests and been violent with the medical staff - we have people who have missed surgeries because of it. And the dumbest part is the doctors here aren’t the decision makers. Doctors, staff and surgeries are being scheduled around protest levels - so yes, anti-vaxx (here) are directly preventing people from getting ‘jabs’ as well as life saving surgery and other things.
Not even close. 1000 to 1 odds, if that. And keep in mind 1 in 10 people is usually crazy.
Yup.
Unless the provider decides for some reason they don’t want you on the platform. It’s their platform, if they say get off, get off. Period. Hosting on a platform is a privilege not a right. If you don’t like it, build your own hosting service.
I have no problem with unvaxxed people. As long as they are held legally accountable for every medical expense incurred by them not doing so. I.E. if you get someone sick and they die, you need to pay the legal consequence of doing so.
If I’m wrong, you get a sore arm. If you are wrong, people keep dying. That’s why I think people treat you like an ass.
Just some.
It's not even about being pro or anti vax. It's about the ability to freely discuss some aspect of modern life. Besides, some of the "misinformation" of yesterday is valid and approved thought of today.
So, you can't claim to support free speech if your company policy is that you can't speak freely about some major aspect of life around the globe right now.
Sure they can. A policy can change at the click of a button - again their products are a privilege not a right. If they want to ban you for using the word pickle, they can arbitrarily do so. Having any other expectation is delusional.
I agree.
Then the phrase and words chosen to describe the product no longer match the reality of the service offered.
Just my two cents.
Sure, but we are on LET. 5% chance of a $2 refund