Slashdot Mirror


Tech Groups Step Away From Gab Network After Shooting (ft.com)

Tech companies including PayPal and Stripe have suspended their services from Gab, a social network catering primarily to US conservatives that had been used by the man accused of killing 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue. From a report: The moves are likely to reopen the debate about the limits of free speech online and the potential for social networks to radicalise users. Gab was launched two years ago by tech entrepreneur Andrew Torba, who became frustrated with what he perceived as a bias against conservative views on California-based social networks such as Facebook and Twitter. His site soon attracted controversial rightwing figures, including Richard Spencer and Alex Jones, who had been suspended or banned from other social networks. Robert Bowers, who has been charged over the shooting at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh on Saturday, was among Gab's hundreds of thousands of users, the company confirmed on Saturday. Mr Bowers, whose profile on Gab featured images of guns and white supremacist iconography, made anti-Semitic posts and threats on the site just hours before the shooting. Since Saturday's shooting, Gab has been accused of not doing enough to prevent free expression from tipping over into hate speech on its site.

Online payments companies PayPal and Stripe, as well as hosting provider Joyent, all said they would stop Gab from using their services, [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled, alternative source] citing violations of their terms of services, which do not allow hate speech. Gab slammed the moves as "direct collusion between big tech giants" against it. This weekend is not the first time that Gab has been sharply criticised for the content it hosts.Last year, after a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, Google removed Gab from Google Play, its mobile app store, claiming it violated its policy on hate speech.

32 of 631 comments (clear)

  1. https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png by hduff · · Score: 4, Insightful
    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    1. Re: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png by makerfixer · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's important to note that a lot of this has to do with payment processors who are under intense pressure from their regulators to police themselves far more than required under law. So the government does not have a neutral opinion in this. Operation Chokepoint and it's constant expansion for instance.

    2. Re: https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png by tinkerton · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Agreed. I had noticed people feeling censored on Twitter and considering the move to Gab. This is an excuse to demonetize Gab. I don't know Gab (not a social media user) but it's likely that it's not just far right wing people who move there.

      I think there's a major censorship operation going on but this is not simple to prove because one person's false positives are another person't real targets. There is so much crap on the web that anyone targeting 'serious' dissident content only has to bundle sufficient crap into each censoring operation to stay under the radar.
      Real freedom of speech protects against this so you don't even have to know which of the two scenarios apply.

    3. Re:https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/free_speech.png by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Your image is shit. That isn't free speech, that's speech controlled by a person/people who's sensibilities are offended.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
  2. Just be happy by makerfixer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Something happened as a god excuse to shutdown the remaining platforms before the election. The worst mistake made by the blog-o-sphere was consolidating into platforms that had a strong ideological bent and zero interest in free-speech.

  3. Free Enterprise by TheDarkener · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These are all non-government corporations making these decisions. If Gab is free to conduct their service how they wish without government intervention, so is PayPal and Stripe. Simple as that.

    --
    It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue.
  4. In two minds... by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 3, Interesting
    On one hand, such networks allow extremely violent people to create an echo chamber and reinforce one another till some one or the other goes over board.

    On the other hand, banning such networks only drives them underground where no one can monitor them, creating an even bigger louder more resonant echo chamber.

    If it is possible for such people to openly express their views, however disturbing they might be, while at the same time remove the perverse incentives for others who make money or leverage political power off them it would be better than banning them outright.

    But it is very difficult to come up with such a solution where there are so many different players and enforcement is very difficult.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  5. You forgot one thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    From: https://medium.com/@getongab/gab-com-statement-on-the-tree-of-life-synagogue-shooting-a6c1de715b39

    "Gab unequivocally disavows and condemns all acts of terrorism and violence. This has always been our policy."

    They have had this policy for a while: https://medium.com/@getongab/gab-disavows-all-political-violence-cc4031b4899d

  6. Can't see the forest! by Mr307 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All these damn trees are in the way!

    All these virtue signalling assholes have lost the plot. WE dont need to be saved, we want free speech.

    If you can't see the vile disgusting edges of speech, then you dont know where the middle is. When you hide, curtail, restrict, and lie about speech then the publics perception of it over time becomes warped and allows for true evil.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    Let the other assholes say their stupid and vile stuff and we are big enough to point our fingers and laugh at them or even take them seriously and fix it ourselves.

  7. On the other side of the spectrum you've got Citi by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    who got away with knowingly laundering money for drug cartels for years (decades?), got to keep all the profits and had little to no repercussions ($100 million dollar fine sounds like a lot unless you consider the profits they made from the illegal activity).

    They way I look at it is like this: Police yourselves so the gov't doesn't have to. See here for a far more amusing take on it though

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  8. Abandon everything then by SirAstral · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is no service that has been created that cannot and has not been used for evil. But don't think for a moment that certain groups are not quick to recognize when one group uses the actions of the few to imply support similar desire by the whole.

    It has taken some time, but many have managed to make even liberty look like it is only a tool used for oppression.... my my my how much work must have gone into convincing people that you cannot be allowed to manage yourself and must instead have your liberties managed for you. All in the name of keeping you safe.

    Tyranny is usually though of as a problem brought on by Government agency... yet the control businesses have gained over our lives it has become clear that economically assaulting another group is more than enough to provide it's own form of tyranny.

    Perhaps other businesses should start to refuse to do business with banks that do this as well... or do they too not fear reprisal? All it takes for a business to become suspect is by mere associate with something now... whether that associate is properly represented or not. We are only going to see more and more of this as we continue down this, "those that do not think like me are evil" path. This is the mindset that gets people to agree with mass genocide of entire groups of people and when those groups feel oppressed, no matter the form that oppression takes they will discover now that when avenues of diplomacy or discussion are taken away, they become isolated... and many unfortunately feel that violence is the final resort of regaining any attention for their cause... no matter how terrible other think of them for it.

  9. And Big Tech? by wjcofkc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No worries, the Giant Tech companies are not responsible for what people say on their platforms. Really this is good news. Gab itself was an innovative reaction to increasing censorship. For that matter BitChute and a few others. So fuck PayPal and Stripe. This will result in competition for them. When you shut something that large out, customers are already waiting.

    --
    Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
  10. I'm not opposed to politics as a protected class by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    but that makes things a little hard for the American Right wing vis-a-vis gay rights, so I don't see that happening. Nonetheless if the right wanted this to stop for real that would be the way to do it.

    That said, I don't think they do. The right wing own all 3 branches of government and nearly all of the media (they dominate talk radio, Fox News' ratings are much higher than MSNBC and, well, as a lefty I can safely say that MSNBC is right wing on economics, just go watch some of their coverage of Orcassio-Cortez and the Medicare for all Issue).

    What I'm saying is this is great for them. It lets them paint themselves not as the ruling class in charge of everything that matters but as an oppressed minority because their extremist aren't welcome. That narrative of oppression grants them sympathy that folks like this normally wouldn't have it.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  11. Re:In before someone says it by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    it would be pretty bad if banks started booting customers who said things they didn't like.

    That may be where we are headed. Conservatives and liberals once talked to each other. Then they started reading different newspapers, watching different TV channels, and moved to different forums on social media. Then forums got banned, and they moved to different social media platforms. Now platforms are being banned, so the next step may be for different ideological groups to have their own app-stores, payment processors, etc.

    What is next? "Conservative" and "liberal" grocery stores? Conservatives banned from Whole Foods, and liberals banned from Walmart? Where will Libertarians shop?

    All this polarization can't be good for our society.

  12. Re:Far-right by Bobrick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This. Where I come from, what people call "the left" in the United States would be considered center-right, at the very least. The liberals there are our right-wing conservatives here trying to privatize everything, austerity measures incessantly diminishing our social services, health care and education, zero environmental vision. That's left-wing in America. The right-wing takes the same starting position and launches forward at lightspeed. It's a fascinating yet profoundly depressing shit show.

  13. Re:Consume or Die by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This.

    The reason things are so fucked up is because we, the consumers, are served content that we ask for.

    We hate one news outlet and love the other. The providers don't give a flying rat's ass as to how we got there, they just want more of us.

    There is a middle ground of sorts with PBS and NPR, but notice that we are not rushing to those sites.

    America has two races: Republicans and Democrats.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  14. Re:In before someone says it by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The reason they haven't also banned Twitter is that Twitter has a policy of not allowing that kind of thing on its network.

    That's complete BS. Twitter allows multiple terrorist organizations to operate on there. They even have terrorist groups like the muslim brotherhood verified. It doesn't get much further in terms of extremism when you're talking about a group that wants to commit genocide because religion tells them to.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  15. Re:In before someone says it by king+neckbeard · · Score: 4, Informative

    The problem is that Gab is filling a niche that Twitter has forced open through bans, and disproportionately just that niche. Throw in the existing persecution complex of those groups and you've got a recipe for trouble, because you've created an even stronger echo chamber for the worst elements.

    --
    This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  16. Re:blame social media by alexgieg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the real world, a "party" is a club of people. These people move around, new people entering, other people leaving, and people changing clubs. And there's an interesting history of how and where the many individuals of the club called "Democrat Party" moved to in the decades since and which people replaced the as those left and where these came from. Google it, and google the same for the club "Republican Party". You'll find all the plot twists quite interesting, if not entertaining.

    --
    Conservatism: (n.) love of the existing evils. Liberalism: (n.) desire to substitute new evils for the existing ones.
  17. Re:In before someone says it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem is that any genuine "conservatives" are so bloody bad at drawing the line between themselves and the racist, hate spewing, violent Nazis out there.

    They are so similar in many cases that the temptation for "conservatives" is to think that they are the same, only that the nazi scum is a bit more "dedicated", and in any case "better dead than red". Which becomes a particularly thorny problem when you define anything to the left of hard core reactionarism as "socialism" or "communism".

    And you're right it's not good for a society. It's what happened in Germany in the past, Nazis to the right, Communists to the left. There are reasons why the people who ultimately bore the responsibility for put old Adolf into power, Alfred Hugenberg and von Hindenburg were very conservative politicians. And there were reasons why the Nazis let Hugenberg retain his place in the Reichstag until 1945, despite all other parties than the NSDAP being banned. These are also the reasons why Europe haven't had the kind of crazy "conservatives" the US has had for a long time; they all convinced themselves that the Nazis weren't so bad, and either joined the "winning" team directly, or allied themselves to them to the extent that they discredited themselves for decades. Only now, when the people who were actually around back in the day are starting to die out, are we beginning to see their ugly faces again - again accompanied by the hate-filled breed of losers they in vain hope they will be able to exploit.

  18. Re:Free Market, RIGHT? by HanzoSpam · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A free market is when willing sellers and willing buyers are prevented from doing business by middlemen with a monopoly position?

    --

    Progressivism: Parasites helping parasites to help themselves - to other people's stuff.
  19. Isn't a lack of change the point by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    of being Conservative? If change isn't happening then they're winning.

    I think you're mixing up the radical right (alt-right?) with actual Conservatives. But even then the radical right wing is doing pretty well for themselves. There's been a massive and successful attack on gov't regulation. Much of Dodd Frank has been repealed. Most of the Obama era EPA guidelines have been eliminated or toned back. Net Neutrality is dead putting control of the internet in the hands of private industry. Mitch McConnell is even able to talk openly about ending Social Security and Medicare. These are policies the far right has wanted for decades and had to back down on.

    Meanwhile the left can't get any tracking on Medicare for All, even though a majority of Republicans support it (let alone Democrats). The left are completely on the defensive in all respects. The right is winning on all fronts.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:Isn't a lack of change the point by GameboyRMH · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Horseshit, they haven't been careful about evaluating change in the Trump era, they plowed ahead with changes at a speed the left could only envy. That's because conservatism is actually about the domination of society by an aristocracy. This can be mistaken for resistance to/caution toward change in a society that was recently or is dominated by an aristocracy if you don't look too closely.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  20. Re:In before someone says it by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Liberals? They're not liberals. Liberals believe in freedom of speech. They might disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it. You are talking about Leftists. Leftists have little use for free speech and will happily silence those with whom they disagree. As is happening here.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  21. Re:Great virtue signalling! by pjrc · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I see this every day on social networking from my liberal friends.

    Historically, conservative leaders took the moral high road and measured their words carefully. But now the conservative standards bearer is saying crap like "If you see somebody getting ready to throw a tomato, knock the crap out of them, would you? Seriously, OK? Just knock the hell ... I promise you I will pay for the legal fees. I promise, I promise".

    Many more statements called "dog whistles" have been made, such as "If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks... Although the Second Amendment people â" maybe there is, I donâ(TM)t know.â

    Now you can say this is all just political hyperbole. You might even try to say it's merely coincidence that violent hate crime is up dramatically over the last 2 years.

    But the point isn't about "proof" or causality. The point is trying to understand the opinions, rather than merely dismissing them as "must really really despise conservatives". This sort of speech which is likely to incite hate and maybe leads to violence is reckless. Until only 2 years ago, far outside the norm of what anyone would consider acceptable from the president or other elected officials.

    Then again, maybe you'd prefer to believe Republican leaders have acted ethically or may be above questioning. In that case, I suppose the only explanation that fits is some folks must just really really despise conservatives.

  22. Re:In before someone says it by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Informative

    When liberals hate conservatives, it is because they do not understand what conservatives believe, nor do they care to learn. When faced with questions such as "One of the worst things a person could do is hurt a defenseless animal" or "Justice is the most important requirement for a society," liberals assumed that conservatives would disagree.

    Jonathan Haidt's experiments ask liberals and conservatives to fill out questionnaires about their values, then to predict how someone from the opposite tribe would fill out the questionnaire. He finds that conservatives are able to predict liberals' answers just fine and seem to have a pretty good understanding of their worldviews, but that liberals have *no idea* how conservatives think or what they value.

    One of the most telling discoveries was that conservatives tend to be curious about what liberals think and why, while liberals see conservatives as inferior "other," inherently incapable of thought. The slur as substitute for argument is glaring on this website.

    One only needs to utter the name "Sarah Palin" to see how interested liberals are in women's rights, or "Clarence Thomas" to see how interested they are in racial equality.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  23. Re:In before someone says it by Powercntrl · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Leftists have little use for free speech and will happily silence those with whom they disagree. As is happening here.

    Wrong. Gab hasn't been silenced, they can still happily Gab away at whatever "thinly-veiled-racism masquerading as a nationalist agendas" trips their trigger. They may have to find another web host or plug their own server hardware into the internet, and accept cryptocurrency instead of PayPal.

    When you start telling business they can't choose to act on their own morals, you might end up telling Christian bakers they've gotta bake that gay wedding cake, too. I've always said it must take a lot of cognitive dissonance to be an alt-righter.

    --

    ---
    DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  24. Then it's not conservatism by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Interesting

    and you shouldn't be using that word. You're misusing it. Perhaps intentionally in order to get real conservatives on your side. I've said this before, but Hilary Clinton was and is the best true conservative in America. She'd have kept everything the same, only making a few minor changes to keep everything on course. She lost because Americans don't want actual conservatism. They want change, and it's no wonder why.

    Also nobody is in favor of small government when it suits them. Folks who get it with a natural disaster want the Fed to come in and help. Most people support a large, national military for defense. And our interstate highway couldn't be built by a small government. The "Conservative" Red states get more money from the fed than they put in and if you touch those subsidies expect their Senators to fight tooth and nail against you.

    What you're really in for is "small enough to drown in a bathtub" government. In other words, small, local governments that can be pushed around by large power organizations. Even if that's not what you want, it's what the folks who fund and run the "small gov't" movement do. And they make the rules.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  25. Re:Free markets at work by hazem · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So why is it that conservatives are big supporters of Israel?

    For many, it's a religious thing for bringing about the "end times" from the Bible's Revelations. For the end times to come, all the Jews have to go back to Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital, before Jesus will come back for his second-coming.

    It's not that these religious conservatives like Jews or Israel in themselves. Supporting Israel is a means to an end, and they're gleeful at the idea of Jews (and all the rest of the heathens) being cast into lakes of fire if they don't convert to Christianity.

    For the rest, it's a geo-political power play.

  26. Re:Goal post moving much? by Cederic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He was an active user of a platform.

    He was also an active user of other platforms, such as Facebook.

    He also shopped at certain supermarkets and wore clothes of a given brand.

    Maybe - just maybe - that doesn't make him belong to any of them. Maybe - just maybe - you're the person trying to shift the narrative and damn Gab by association.

    Stop it. You're being a cunt.

  27. Re:Goal post moving much? by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 4, Informative

    he was an active member of a community that in turn actively encourages folks like him to come to their side. You know this. You're trying to shift the narrative. I don't think anyone's gonna fall for it though. At least not anyone who doesn't _want_ to fall for it. Flag as Inappropriate

    This is disengenuous AF. They actively encourage everybody to join their service. Is there something wrong with your brain?

    You (and OP) make it sound like Gab is a "conservative" forum. It isn't. It's about free speech for everybody, not just a few.

  28. Re:Goal post moving much? by fafalone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Yup, the owner is going on Alex Jones to talk about how biased everyone is against his platform used pretty much exclusively by awful people. He's totally neutral.