AR15.COM is down. Godaddy booted them off their servers

[Lakenut]

So how do they justify taking down Newsmax?

 

[chuter]

Newsmax seems to work for me.

 

[cowzrul]

I actually worked 20 years for the big guys architecting their data centers and do know how this works and what it costs to get in the game. It's not that easy pal, Do you have about 5 oklahoma oil wells flowing 100 bbls a day? Didn't think you did. That kind of jack is just for starters. You cannot buy servers and just stick them on the internet and start selling hosting services. The Big Com companies own the pipes and portals. They are the ones controlling the net, not just any guy with an idea and a few bucks.

In earLy 2005 I drove my two servers that I built to a data center in Atlanta. A few hours later I was able to ssh into my os with a static IP. Installed vBulletin and let my nameservers propagate. At the time those two little cat 5 drops cost me about $500 a month for the bandwidth i was allotted. It doesn’t take an oil well to run your own server.

 

[Parks 788]

On the ARFCom side I didn't really notice as there's only a few threads I follow and I tend to keep them pinned. I'd imagine that a site like ARFCom would have a much better chance at legal action though as they worked to actively moderate to stay inside of a ToS whereas Parler specifically stated that they believed anything goes.

So, go ahead and put a link to where Parler said "anything goes". Let's see it. Actual quotes and statements that state what you are claiming.

 

[dennishoddy]

Well... Guess there's a market for pro-free speech webhosting... Who wants to group buy some servers and charge a mint?

I have read that some are asking for Elon Musk to start an online service, but he is a lib so it probably wouldn't be much different.
He has the change though to do it.

 

[dennishoddy]

So their idea is the same as what Britain did to porn. Make you opt in.

The problem is?

 

[Rez Exelon]

The problem is?

What's the word for hat... hrmmm. Oh, right... censorship.

It's kind of the same as we complain about here on this board when states make you get a license to carry. That gets labeled an infringement. Same principle applies to the internet... it's all open or it's all "open to be censored" at the isp level. Just s it should be a personal choice to carry or not, it should be a personal choice without barrier to visit a site or not.

 

[dennishoddy]

What's the word for hat... hrmmm. Oh, right... censorship.

It's kind of the same as we complain about here on this board when states make you get a license to carry. That gets labeled an infringement. Same principle applies to the internet... it's all open or it's all "open to be censored" at the isp level. Just s it should be a personal choice to carry or not, it should be a personal choice without barrier to visit a site or not.

Maybe the opt in is for young people that shouldn't be watching porn so the site can get confirmation they are following the laws of the country they are in? Pesky little detail?

 

[Rez Exelon]

So, go ahead and put a link to where Parler said "anything goes". Let's see it. Actual quotes and statements that state what you are claiming.

I believe the interview with their founder was from Good day San Francisco where he said his belief was that they'd only try to moderate according to fcc/scotus guidelines and that they approached that as "if you can say it on he streets of New York you can at it here". I wish I could grab screencaps from their site but it's slightly offline at the moment.

 

[Rez Exelon]

Maybe the opt in is for young people that shouldn't be watching porn so the site can get confirmation they are following the laws of the country they are in? Pesky little detail?

Ahhhh... you endorse a nanny state then rather than personal responsibility. Got it. I didn't even know you switched parties.