So I ran into this today. Cliff notes: AT&T is currently blocking the /b/ forums from 4chan.
I only went to /b/ once, to see what the hubbub was about, and haven't felt a need to go back since. But somehow, knowing that somewhere out there in cyberspace is an abyssal cesspit of terrible memes so twisted that it's nearly Lovecraftian... I dunno. Knowing it exists makes me happier. It's almost like knowing that magic is real.
More to the point, there are serious concerns for an internet provider setting precedents on the ability to restrict people's access to specific sites.
Ever more to the point, this seem remarkably stupid on AT&T's part. It's like poking a bee hive ("/b/ hive", get it!?), except it's full of lovecraftian horrors itching for a chance to manifest in the real world instead of bees.
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
It would really help the Blue Ribboners' cause if they would think about what they are saying.
ATT, a private company, decides to block access to a website. This is not an issue of censorship. They are not Nazis. They are a private corporation who has decided to refuse to provide a service. It's their *right* to do so. It's your right not to use them. Yes, they are pretty much the only residential DSL provider in the country, but that's because cable internet has made residential DSL largely cost ineffective so no one wants in on that market.
I am all for freedom. The people who are actually up in arms about this-- the ones implicitly demanding that someone needs to do something-- are not. They are demanding that ATT do things their way. This hubub is akin to calling 7-11 "a bunch of Nazis" because they don't carry Hustler.
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
It isn't a first amendment issue, but it certainly is censorship. Censorship isn't a purely governmental endeavor. Furthermore, protesting legally acceptable but unwanted acts of corporations is a time-honored way of getting them changed, not just voting with dollars. In part because protesting can lead to even more people voting with dollars.
And one could even argue there are rights involved based on common carrier status.
edit: and lots of people get up in arms about lots of actions of private corporations. So long as those people restrict themselves to legal methods of protest, I don't really get how they are not for freedom. Being for freedom doesn't mean being for anyone doing anything legal without protest, especially when that "anything" has an impact on others.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:Knowing it exists makes me happier.
Whereas my feeling about it is almost exactly the opposite.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
This isn't good for AT&T. This is a can of worms that didn't need to be opened. It's not as if there aren't worse places on the internet than 4chan. Why make this choice? Why block this place, of all places? It seems completely counterproductive to me. It isn't the place of our corporations to monitor our morality. It's so nonsensical for AT&T to do this, it makes me wonder if blocking of the .img 4chan server might be a test balloon for something else. Just thinking out loud. I don't believe AT&T has commented on the matter, so it's hard to guess at their reasoning on this.
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
What's the connection, aspectre, if you please?
Posted by twinky (Member # 693) on :
I agree with fugu, and also with Tom.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
quote:I am all for freedom. The people who are actually up in arms about this-- the ones implicitly demanding that someone needs to do something-- are not. They are demanding that ATT do things their way. This hubub is akin to calling 7-11 "a bunch of Nazis" because they don't carry Hustler.
The difference being that the internet is one place where anyone can have access to whatever information is out there. The corollary being anyone can use the internet to get information out there to whoever wants it. And there are relatively few providers out there.
If AT&T can block specific websites, then the other few companies can also block specific websites. If all the internet providers began blocking, say, political websites that didn't match the CEO's ideology, that is unquestionably bad for the world.
/b/ is not a political website. The world may indeed be better off without it (although we wouldn't have lolcats or rickrolling...). But allowing companies to block it sets up a dangerous precedent.
Posted by MightyCow (Member # 9253) on :
My understanding of the situation, which I admit is incomplete, is that AT&T detected a DoS attack against an AT&T customer, which they traced as coming from the 4chan server, so they blocked 4chan as a way to stop the DoS.
PC World has the story here. A little bit more of a neutral view. On the face of things, I find AT&T's explanation pretty preposterous. Correct me if I'm wrong -- they're saying that the 4chan servers themselves were directly being utilized in a DOS attack? That's implausible.
Posted by Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (Member # 7476) on :
Except it was 4chans fault after all.
quote: “For the past three weeks, 4chan has been under a constant DDoS attack,” Moot wrote in an afternoon update. “We were able to filter this specific type of attack in a fashion that was more or less transparent to the end user. … Unfortunately, as an unintended consequence of the method used, some Internet users received errant traffic from one of our network switches. A handful happened to be AT&T customers.”
Okay. Mystery solved. The world makes sense again.
Posted by James Tiberius Kirk (Member # 2832) on :
quote:Knowing it exists makes me happier.
Really?
--j_k
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
In a weird way, yes. Happy might not be the right word, but for me, knowing /b/ exists is as close to I'll come to believing in ghosts or the devil or Cthulhu. It may be scary as hell, but knowing that such a bizarre, insanity-inspiring place is real tickles my imagination.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
If it weren't populated by people, I might share your view. But since it is, it goes from being a mythical, wondrous underworld to just another place where stupid people act mean (and mean people act stupid.)
Posted by fugu13 (Member # 2859) on :
I have a hard time viewing /b/ as anything other than slightly silly, since I'm familiar with 2ch.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I just checked out 4chan and its completely unreadable, its all one massive thread with no thought to organization and is extremely cluttered, furthering its unreadability is that everyone has varying sized avatars with no limitation on their size so you get effed up threads of varying sizes with no clear idea of whose replying to whom and gods save the poor soul who TRIES to find something in the abomination of what they call an 'image board' through whatever search feature they have, which I'm surprised it didn't already grow sentient and subsequently commit suicide as gods forgive the algorithm that has to shift through the oversized kitty litter that is 4chan.
Its a terrible place stay away, abandon all hope ye who enter there!
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
That's part of what adds to the mystique of the place for me. The baffling, unpredictable nature of the boards I think plays a part in driving the people who go there further insane. It's not just a matter of "a bunch of dumb people get together and do dumb things," the collective inertia of the social construct that results is enough to drive mad those who don't have the good sense to look away. I suspect there is a qualitative difference between a 4chaner by themselves and a 4chaner while they are participating in the collective.
I also don't think it's accurate to say there are nothing but stupid people doing nothing but mean things, I think it's mostly just pure silliness without regard from structure or consequences. This obviously will attract some people who are genuinely mean, giving them an opportunity to do so, and the total anonymity provides a mask that allows even reasonable people to end up doing some mean things as well, but I don't think that's their primary purpose or what they spend the majority of their time doing.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
I don't know about "mean" as I couldn't actually physically read the text.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
the "mean" part was in response to Tom, who in turn I think was reference that /b/ does periodically attack other websites for fun. I'm not sure how often that happens and what percentage of the /b/ population actually participates.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
The internet needs /b/ just like cities need storm drains and sewers.
You could get rid of it, but it'll just flush the crap up to ground level.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
That... is a remarkably accurate metaphor.
Posted by ricree101 (Member # 7749) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The internet needs /b/ just like cities need storm drains and sewers.
You could get rid of it, but it'll just flush the crap up to ground level.
Though the lolcats meme is proof that it sometimes manages to find its way up regardless.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
Generally, the memes that reach the general internet population I find genuinely funny, although I admit that even the best of them get annoying when overused.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
Raym, how's your homework coming?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
And THAT, gentlefolk, is why my parents are not allowed on Hatrack. (There was a one-time exception.)
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
it's comin'.... *sheepishly slinks away*
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:The internet needs /b/ just like cities need storm drains and sewers.
You could get rid of it, but it'll just flush the crap up to ground level.
I don't buy that argument. Before the Internet, what was the equivalent? Did people simply manage to eke out a miserable existence without being able to anonymously destroy someone's life from a thousand miles away? What did they do for fun when they weren't ruining someone's enjoyment of his or her favorite MMO?
/b/ isn't a necessary outlet for social pressure. It's a breeding ground for adolescent sociopaths.
Posted by Blayne Bradley (Member # 8565) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: And THAT, gentlefolk, is why my parents are not allowed on Hatrack. (There was a one-time exception.)
Awesome.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Blayne, I don't live in their home nor are they supporting me. Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:Originally posted by rivka: And THAT, gentlefolk, is why my parents are not allowed on Hatrack. (There was a one-time exception.)
Yeah, well I was here first.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
It's so nice of you to share!