Posted on 08/06/2019 11:21:14 PM PDT by knighthawk
But it was posted on Instagram first but that’s facebook owned and we all know facebook is ‘too big to fail’
or to do any wrong
Well their logic is sound for an 8 year old. Bad things happen in a business they like. No problem. Bad things happen in a business they dont like. Shut it down !
ignore that link. it was for a different thread.
They are having a much harder time getting back on line than I thought that they would. If then end up only being available on the dark web via Tor then, for all intents and purposes they are effectively dead.
Gab was able to resurrect their site, but it took months. When the eventually re-emerged the old content was there, but they had a new URL (Gab.com, replacing Gab.ai I think).
As others have mentioned 8chan is the home of Q, so shutting it down is putting a crimp in Q, though I think there are many other ways that Q could easily find to post his messages that would not require him (them) getting all of 8chan up.
But with any of them there will be potential for authenticity issues. (Where as most people who understand the 8 chan "tripcode" system believe it's secure and that Q and only Q has been posting under that moniker on 8chan.
Q previously migrated from 4chan to 8chan, which was claimed to be due to security concerns.
Under the previous regime the Internet, which the USA invented with a lot of funding from DARPA, was administered by the commerce department. All the registrars and then the URLs flowed down from the commerce department.
As a part of FedGov they are strictly controlled by strong First Amendment constraints. Eventually even someone with extremely distasteful (but not illegal) views was going to be able to get a domain, because the Government can't not give you a domain anymore than they can refuse to give you a postal address.
But, Obama gave control of the Internet away to an multinational NGO that set itself up for just that purpose. Now they are the ultimate aribtrar of how the URL and DNS allocation system works, and if you don't like it and sue them some judge will just say "well, they are a private entity, so it's not censorship when they choose not to give you MAGA site a URL".
We know the courts will say this, they say this about Google already.
So, Obama made tyrants and control-freaks very happy with his gift of the Internet to ICANN.
The Internet Is Actually Controlled By 14 People Who Hold 7 Secret Keys
The useless Republicans didn't put up much of a fight to prevent this.
I agree with you, if access method becomes more complex, the site dies.
Your history of Q migration is mixed up, but even a huge mixup in the history is inconsequential.
I do find the various means of manipulating the beliefs of segments of the population to be fascinating. The official narrative is losing its persuasive power (not many people trust the government or the press to tell the truth), but in the end that doesn't matter as long as the elections can be controled, and the elits have the law and legal force of violence behind them. IOW, being morally just isn't necessary to rule. Brute force and propaganda gets the job done.
I can see another political circus in front of the cameras.
I see the Dems fighting for every inch of the political battlefield. Every day. I see the GOP asleep at the wheel and/or undermining POTUS. Graham threatened Comey with hearings in March. It is now August adn the Senate is on vacation. With Republicans like that who needs Democrats?
The official narrative is losing its persuasive power (not many people trust the government or the press to tell the truth),
Here's an interesting factoid. The highest rated Fox News show (which is Tucker or Sean Hannity depending on the week) gets about 3 million unique viewers a week. (CNN is lucky to break a million.)
The old broadcast networks ABC, NBC, CBS get about 8 million each for their prime time news shows. . Maybe there is some overlap, of people who watch two or more network news casts, but I suspect it's small.
So, I think we internet-obsessed, Freepin' , comment forum savvy folks sometimes forget that there is a HUGE swath of people still surviving on mid 20th century information access.
There are also tons of millenials who get news in ways that are odd. It's like when X'ers got news from Comedy Central, only know it's even more obscure sites and technologies.
Which gets to your next point:
but in the end that doesn't matter as long as the elections can be controled,
I think they are working hard to maintain propaganda superiority. MS-NBC going hard left was part of that, and they dragged all of NBC (with its much larger viewship) with them. Meet The Press, the oldest show on TV, a show that a lot of people like my Mom rely on, is now a horrible leftist dumpster fire. (Tim Russert is rolling in his grave.)
As for this point:
IOW, being morally just isn't necessary to rule. Brute force and propaganda gets the job done
That's the norm in human affairs. The USA had a great run where he tried to do better, but it seems like thats coming to an end and we are entering back into the "Might Makes Right" style that is the norm through most of human history.
and the elites have the law and legal force of violence behind them.
Yes, and they sure don't like having armed citizens out there, either.
Gee, I wonder why? What do they plan on doing next?
Amazingly, even on vacation the GOP seems to be able to negotiate a surrender on hysteria driven gun control, in contradiction to what most of us GOP voters want.
So, we are still at risk now even when the are supposedly recessed. It's exhausting.
Not that they are well informed, they aren't. Just that they make up a worldview (with help from their uninformed friends) that substantially contradicts the official (government) and press narratives.
Very interesting times indeed. The world is a brutal, tough place.
The anons will win.
Here is an interesting thought experiment:
If the new rules are "anything sufficiently disturbing to many people has to come down off the internet", then can we get the entire porno industry off there?
People are freaking out about 8chan because it briefly allowed a manifesto to be presented on their site.
What about the huge amount of porno, Drudge reports that collectively it gets more traffic than anything else on the web.
What's the social cost associated with that? Can we have a discussion about it and maybe turn off the DNS for all porno sites?
When did we throw in the towel on porno? Ashcroft under Reagan was still prosecuting it.
I'm alot more worried about young kids getting into porno on the web than of them finding 8chan (which, I know does have porno on it, but is not the main feature of the site)
People are freaking out about 8chan because
It is humbly borrowed from St. Vincent Ferrer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.