Slashdot Mirror


AT&T Blocks Part of 4chan

holdenkarau writes "Several news sources (Mashable, The Inquistr, etc.) are reporting that AT&T is blocking img.4chan.org in the southern United States. That server is used for the infamous /b/ board (the home of anonymous). TechCrunch calls the decision to block 4chan 'stupid,' noting that they may have 'opened perhaps the most vindictive, messy can of worms.' The Inquisitr suggests that 'The global internet censorship debate landed in the home of the free.' moot (who runs 4chan) asks users to call AT&T, while some others suggest more drastic action (like cutting AT&T fiber)." Update: 07/27 09:23 GMT by T : Readers' comments below suggest that a) the purpose of the block was to curtail the effects of a serious DDoS attack and b) that the block has now been lifted, at least for some regions.

7 of 342 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Before we act too hastily.. by SmarkWoW · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    You don't haul a girl off to jail if she was raped do you?

  2. Re:Net Neutrality by TheKidWho · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I don't think AT&T would care too much of the opinion of a group of 15 year olds.

  3. Re:What is the real problem? by DurendalMac · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Get over yourself. Most people don't know what /b/ is, and people on /b/ post horrific, nasty shit simply for the shock value. It's a site full of maladjusted, misogynistic kids and little more.

  4. Re:Net Neutrality by DurendalMac · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    "Better behaved"? Maybe when it comes to a very large corporate behemoth like AT&T, but when it comes to, say, Adam Goldstein, they'll make someone's life absolute hell. How about porno-bombing Youtube? DDoSes against websites they just happen to not like? Anon may not be the worst internet vigilante groups, but don't kid yourself. Anon is comprised mostly of maladjusted, misogynistic kids. And since Anonymous is, well, anonymous, you don't get "cast out" without being b&.

  5. Re:Net Neutrality by DurendalMac · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Um, no, it's because Anon has deliberately terrorized people before (calling in with death threats is something they've been known to do), so they get the label. Kinda silly, but the definition does fit.

  6. Re:Idiots by DurendalMac · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    No, AT&T would sue and prosecute the living fuck out of anyone who tried and probably crack down harder on 4chan. Don't underestimate their lobbying power.

  7. Re:Before we act too hastily.. by eltaco · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    actually, you do under sharia law.

    --
    It's not about fate, it's about character.
    there be no shelter here, the frontline is everywhere!