The livestream (which by the way was shared by the Kiwifarms owner) was spread on Facebook by many users.
Facebook deployed a fingerprinting solution to identify this video being reposted. Not just taking it down once, but taking down all submissions.
Noone expects that from Kiwifarms because they don't need it anyways. No matter what they tell you, they don't have that big of a comment stream. It takes less than 30 seconds to find an account with some Nazist symbolism in username or profile picture and they persist for years. Tell me how that adds up please.
If folks aren't exposed to radical ideologies regularly - if everything they read on a screen is True and Safe - what happens when they stumble across a dark corner of the internet and are exposed for the first time? Censorship erodes our ability to critically evaluate, without actually stamping out the censored topic.
Frequent exposure to something normalizes that thing, it doesn’t make it stick out and be more identifiable.
Seeing a mainstream interview with Louis Theroux and debate livestream with Destiny quickly outs him as a white nationalist with an incoherent worldview.
If the only way to hear his ideas, directly from his mouth, are on his platform in a dark corner of the internet you're only going to get his one-sided propaganda.
[citation needed]. Even IRL law in extremely pro-free-speech nations is rife with "imminent threat of danger" exceptions to their laws.
Opinion. But also, no one's First Amendment rights was violated here. No one has a right to post on a website.
I've spent quite a bit of time trying to compare the idea of a physical building for discussion (privately owned, to make the comparison fair) to a website like Twitter. I've come to the conclusion that if I ran a physical building where anyone could rent it out, and it came to light that neo-Nazis or other horrible people were using it, there would probably be protests. People would gather outside, or forcibly enter the building to disrupt it, or make my life difficult. While you can argue that this is mob rule, this is how society functions. If you're doing something a lot of people find reprehensible, they're going to let you know about it, and they're going to encourage others to join them.
> These people aren't going to shrug and walk away because a website goes down, they'll congregate somewhere else.
That might seem to be the case at first glance.
[0], 6.3:
>By shutting down these echo chambers of hate, Reddit caused the people participating to either leave the site or dramatically change their linguistic behavior (as measured via our hate lexicons).
[0], 6.6:
> Recent work has shown that some banned subreddit users migrated to other social media sites like Voat, Snapzu, and Empeopled.
However, the numbers were smaller than expected:
[1], 7:
> Despite the hysteria concerning a mass exodus from Reddit, our behavior trend analysis shows that no such exodus occurred, though a small user migration was apparent.
Furthermore, of the sites listed, the one that was most notorious for free speech absolutism (Voat) was shut down due to lack of funding. The others appear to all be up, albeit Empeopled is apparently being rebuilt on the blockchain - I'm sure that will go well.
[0] https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3134666
[1] https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14750/1459...
Death threats are generally not legal, but ones that are obvious hyperbole might be. Natural language processing algorithms might be able to identify death threats automatically, but they struggle with hyperbole and sarcasm. But so do humans.
What Cloudflare did was legal too.
Context matters and attempts to avoid acknowledging context to create false equivalency is a big reason why most Twitter and Reddit arguments are so-toxic.
Most (almost all in reality) of the Nazi symbolism is from people who are shit-posting and would find the Nazi's rightfully abhorrent.
Many people don’t have the luxury of assuming that people brandishing Nazi symbolism are shit-posting. For quite a few that symbolism represents an existential threat.
