Return to

(Oh the irony thread closed) Gab hosting and DNS services terminated because of user content


In some ways, highly controversial content is worse than illegal stuff. If you’re running a forum to buy/sell stolen credit cards or a “stresser” DDoS service, you only have to worry about a court order. But if your site knowingly hosts racists banned from other platforms, one of your users goes out and has himself a massacre, and you decline to clean up your act, you may find yourself being dropped by upstream providers.

So it might be that even “bulletproof” providers wouldn’t touch Gab, now that their users jumped past being assholes and into mass murder. Then only Tor remains. Tor is way too slow for interactive browsing or downloading files, but would work perfectly fine for a Twitter clone.


Has a datacenter ever dropped someone over content?

You’d think that there would be plenty of international options. I’m sure many hosting platforms in Russia would be happy to provide both domain registration and hosting.


Joyent and Gab, for virtual.

Are you talking about physical? I’m sure it’s happened.

Either way, They’ve raised at least 15M. That’s more than enough to build a datacenter and get bandwidth in.

Honestly, the solution might be to just go all out and build a datacenter with “free speech” attached to it. What’s gonna happen? insert red state here gonna come in and eminent domain the land?

They’re actively fighting the “russian bot” narrative. For obvious reasons, hosting in Russia would be a bad idea.

Additionally Russia doesn’t have free speech, so that’d probably be a bad idea.

I keep coming back to “build your own datacenter”


Sure, if you violate their TOS. Usually for spamming, way back in the day. These days they use cloud-based VMs paid with stolen credit cards.

I thought the same thing about bulletproof hosts, but I mean, if one of your users actually kills a bunch of people, that’s a tough one even for a service targeting criminals. I mean there’s a big difference between stealing credit cards and even dealing hardcore drugs and mass murder.


Don’t quote me on this, but Google was within their rights to cancel the account, as the domain doesn’t technically belong to the leaseholder.

From Google Domains ToS

I don’t blame them. I wouldn’t want my company associated with a site like that.


This is a frustrating false equivalency. The user in question is one of 700k, and more importantly, also has a Facebook and Twitter.


Once again. You can’t make that claim when thousands of accounts on Twitter and Facebook broadcast evil and racist shit daily. Gab bans illegal content such as threats of violence. And so does Twitter and Facebook. I’m failing to see a difference here.


Yeah, I mean if they have $15 million, then I don’t see what the issue is other than they’ll be down for a while. If they can’t figure out how to turn $15 million into a functioning website, then it’s on them.


Perception matters. When you start a service specifically targeting people who got banned from other platforms, you are opening yourself up to criticism when one of them turns out to be not just a loser but a mass murderer.


Twitter and Facebook run their own data centers. Presumably, gab will soon too.


I think it’s a matter of time. They’re probably working on something in the backend, but they probably just don’t want everyone to know about it.

Frankly, it would be better for them to say “Announcing the only datacenter dedicated to 1A! Come on over to Fort Worth, Texas and colo with Gab.datacenter!”

Who’s dealing hard drugs?

You keep bringing up mass murder, but you forget that this is the first mass murderer to have a Gab account. Tons more mass murderers have Facebook/Twitter/Youtube accounts. By that logic, you’re less likely to be a murderer if you’re on Gab. We should probably shut down Facebook, Twitter and Youtube so we can keep these murderers off the internet.


That’s their fault. They should have seen this coming and established hosting independence already.


I forgot nothing. Again, comes down to perception.

Anyway, what they should do is move to a decentralized platform like Mastodon. But then they wouldn’t be able to monetize it.


This isn’t just a discussion about domain registrars either. You have companies like Visa/PayPal/Square and others who have outright blacklisted websites from using their services. Effectively leaving the only option of crypto currency.

And even then places like Coinbase have banned accounts sent to websites or users that coinbase does not like.


People on Twitter.

True, but the platform has only been available for two years. I wonder if that should factor into anything? Maybe, maybe not.

I’d argue with the crowd that they attract, proudly, that likely isn’t to be the case.

I’d argue we keep Gab up so they have a safe space to go rather than shit up the rest of the Internet. :man_shrugging:

But no one asked me.


That’s the thing. Lots of the people on there are banned for having a political view that disagrees with the silicon valley tech companies political views.

There are also tons of people on Gab who aren’t banned from those sites. I’m on Gab. I’m not banned from Twitter/Facebook (although, I voluntarily closed my facebook account)

Calling people banned for being conservative losers is exactly the kind of bad perception that’s polarizing the country. You’re either accepting of a wide range of political views (you don’t have to agree, just don’t hate people for it) or you’re part of the problem. Only fascists silence opinions they disagree with.


What do you want to do? Pass a law compelling companies to do business with gab? I understand that the nature of gab makes their operations more difficult, but not impossible.

What is your solution?


Nobody was banned for being a conservative. That isn’t again Facebook or Twitter’s rules. And you know it.

Racism is not a valid political view. It may be moving to the mainstream, but that doesn’t make it acceptable.

“Kill all the jews” is not a reasoned alternative to Democrats. It isn’t conservative. It’s extreme far-right.


Well a bakery has been forced to bake a cake against their religious wishes. That’s still in court, so what’s the difference?


There’s no such thing as an “invalid opinion.”