Poll: Do you think HN should go dark in protest of SOPA?
I think Hacker News should stand with reddit to go dark in support of SOPA. SOPA seems very important for the future of HN and startups associated with ycombinator.
293 comments
HN is used by a miniscule number of internet users almost 100% of HN users are pretty much aware of SOPA and why it is bad. Shutting it down even for a day will actually help the government because we wont be able to discuss why SOPA is bad for that particular day.
HN should be up. Instead of going dark, a better thing to do will be to declare the day SOPA protest day and post links/discussions related only to SOPA. Or get prominent people to write/live chat/video chat about why SOPA is bad.
HN should be up. Instead of going dark, a better thing to do will be to declare the day SOPA protest day and post links/discussions related only to SOPA. Or get prominent people to write/live chat/video chat about why SOPA is bad.
It should change in the regions of the world that will be affected by SOPA; rather than going dark, display a pseudo government notice about the site being closed to citizens, and below that give instructions on how you can circumvent it and see HN, in exactly the way people will circumvent SOPA when it arrives. People get to see HN, and awareness is raised, and everyone gets to learn how to circumvent it.
Yes, please.
I'm sure we can all make do without HN for one day, and it would definitely help the protests.
And to everyone who says that if you are not from the US, thers nothing you can do: actually thats not completely right. If the media in your country picks this up it will vastly amplify the message. (Think: "worldwide outcry becaues of SOPA")
(btw, I'm not from the US either)
I'm sure we can all make do without HN for one day, and it would definitely help the protests.
And to everyone who says that if you are not from the US, thers nothing you can do: actually thats not completely right. If the media in your country picks this up it will vastly amplify the message. (Think: "worldwide outcry becaues of SOPA")
(btw, I'm not from the US either)
[deleted]
The point of going dark is to announce to bystanders the peril. Everyone who reads Hacker News already knows the peril...
Anyone who cares about Hacker News already opposes SOPA.
Anyone who supports SOPA would be glad to see Hacker News down for a day.
What's the point of shutting down Hacker News again?
Anyone who supports SOPA would be glad to see Hacker News down for a day.
What's the point of shutting down Hacker News again?
I think it's supposed to be for solidarity. It's not to raise awareness on HN as much as show that we are right there with the others.
It's going to be a pretty painful day for HN readers without it.
But this might be a good thing. We will have to struggle through a day's worth of a world without HN and be motivated to do something about it.
+1 for blackout for me.
But this might be a good thing. We will have to struggle through a day's worth of a world without HN and be motivated to do something about it.
+1 for blackout for me.
I don't see how that'd benefit a community like Hacker News.
Probably not. Nobody would notice except people who already don't support it.
HN could go dark with Reddit to see what happens when nerds have nowhere to hang out.
Absolutely yes. Sure, most Hacker News readers know about SOPA but how many of those have actively opposed that bill yet? Raising awareness can't be bad, especially as this probably is the last opportunity to effectively take a stand in this matter.
Everyone is going to say how this is preaching to the choir. But I think it's good if it goes black so the largest news media has even more of a story. It's one thing if just Reddit goes black, that will be a big news story. But it's another thing if many sites on the internet go black.
Come to think of it, I may do this with my website as well. It's no hacker news or Reddit, but it's a good day to do it.
Come to think of it, I may do this with my website as well. It's no hacker news or Reddit, but it's a good day to do it.
reddit is down all day multiple times a year and it's never a "big news story"
According to that logic, it wouldn't matter either if Twitter, Google Apps, Blackberry Messenger, iCloud+Siri, and Dropbox were to shut down for the day...
Kind of a bad comparison - BBM messenger being down WAS a big news story, twitter & google apps aren't down all day multiple times a year and while I'm not sure about the reliability of siri or dropbox I'm pretty sure neither of them being offline would be a "huge news story", unless your idea of a huge news story is one that's covered by betabeat
Don't forget Verizon's LTE network.
Heh, the new to activism hive mind is strong here.
We should have an erlang day on jan 18th
Erlang is about all HN could talk about in a post-SOPA world without risking shutdown.
That is, until someone shares Erlang: the Movie [1], then it is game over.
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKfKtXYLG78
[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKfKtXYLG78
1) The more sites decide to shut down on the 18th, the easier it becomes for major websites like Google, Twitter, and Facebook to join. It also increases the chances that this is going to be covered by the mainstream media.
2) Perhaps a blackout will give some HNers the final push (and time) to make some phone calls to their representatives.
3) It can serve as a demonstration of what the web will be like if SOPA kicks in. Many HNers think that SOPA is a bad idea, a blackout will make us feel it as well.
2) Perhaps a blackout will give some HNers the final push (and time) to make some phone calls to their representatives.
3) It can serve as a demonstration of what the web will be like if SOPA kicks in. Many HNers think that SOPA is a bad idea, a blackout will make us feel it as well.
What he said on all accounts.
"2) Perhaps a blackout will give some HNers the final push (and time) to make some phone calls to their representatives."
Besides, it'll give us something to do!
Besides, it'll give us something to do!
What's the probability that major websites join the movement?
One one hand a 24-hour outage would result in loss of a couple of bucks, but on the other, they in fact participated in the IPv6 day, so I'm not sure.
One one hand a 24-hour outage would result in loss of a couple of bucks, but on the other, they in fact participated in the IPv6 day, so I'm not sure.
One of the proposals I saw was not a complete blackout but for a interstitial notice to be inserted for 30 seconds (that can't be cancelled). I prefer such a proposal because if you need to look up critical info, you still can.
If they do that, I will make an extention to get around it.
The only way to get a bad law stopped is to destroy the people behind it.
The only way to get a bad law stopped is to destroy the people behind it.
see 1) of grand-parent. And remember there are creative ways to do a blackout. Darken the page, map or Google Doodle. Something to raise awareness, and increase coverage. No need to pull the DNS or serve a blank black page
I think they can and should, but I think the IPv6 Day comparison is a bad one. It was a pretty small portion of users with broken IPv6 configurations/networks who were expected to be significantly inconvenienced, not the entire userbase.
FWIW, I think if Google, Twitter, and/or Facebook joined, they'd just put up custom messages (maybe with a link?) to an anti-SOPA page.
Of course, the question is, how do they define their political neutrality after this?
Of course, the question is, how do they define their political neutrality after this?
Google has a decent (not perfect) track record of arguing in support of free speech around the world. They're not politically neutral.
They admit there isn't such a thing as political neutrality, I'd hope.
It's not even a case of politics for these companies. They need to avoid regulation to survive.
The most important asset these companies have are highly skilled and sought after researchers. How appealing will Google be to work for if the projects they work on are designed to:
* prevent access to information that researchers require for their studies
* stall or prevent innovation
* favour established and inflexible industries over startups
* increase the amount of bureaucracy everyone has to deal with
* force problems into hiding rather than providing real solutions
The most important asset these companies have are highly skilled and sought after researchers. How appealing will Google be to work for if the projects they work on are designed to:
* prevent access to information that researchers require for their studies
* stall or prevent innovation
* favour established and inflexible industries over startups
* increase the amount of bureaucracy everyone has to deal with
* force problems into hiding rather than providing real solutions
I think not allowing SOPA and PIPA to pass, by itself defines neutrality. They just want the Internet the remain like it's always been - unaffected by politics.
>> 2) Perhaps a blackout will give some HNers the final push (and time) to make some phone calls to their representatives.
I think far more effective than a complete blackout would be requiring HNers contact their representatives before they can access HN content. Not sure how best to implement, but a email form that grants a token upon completion should be feasible (you'd need to decide how to handle non-US based IPs).
I have my doubts regarding the effectiveness of form emails on congresspeople, but I imagine those HNers who were going to call or write a more personal letter still will, with the added benefit of massive form emails from those less motivated to do so otherwise.
edit: grammar
I think far more effective than a complete blackout would be requiring HNers contact their representatives before they can access HN content. Not sure how best to implement, but a email form that grants a token upon completion should be feasible (you'd need to decide how to handle non-US based IPs).
I have my doubts regarding the effectiveness of form emails on congresspeople, but I imagine those HNers who were going to call or write a more personal letter still will, with the added benefit of massive form emails from those less motivated to do so otherwise.
edit: grammar
This is exactly what HN should not do. Making a statement by having the site down for a day is one thing (although I'm also opposed to that, and I voted no in the poll), but actively forcing your users to help some cause even though they may have completely different opinion is something else entirely. I, for one, wouldn't want to participate on such a website. HN should support free thinking, not suppress it. I, as well as probably 95% of people here, am against SOPA. But if, for some reason, some of the HN users are pro SOPA, we should respect the fact that they have a different opinion on the matter and not force them to accept our views, even if we strongly disagree with them.
If people want to write to their congressperson, they should do that of their own accord, not because they're being pushed into doing that to access HN content.
If people want to write to their congressperson, they should do that of their own accord, not because they're being pushed into doing that to access HN content.
Ironically, the reason this won't work is the same reason SOPA won't: proxies. HN is one of the largest gatherings of hackers anywhere; give us a break.
That's in addition to the fact that it's consensus that emails aren't worth a damn here.
And also the fact that it would take significant wasted effort to implement.
If PG did something like this, I'd lose all respect.
That's in addition to the fact that it's consensus that emails aren't worth a damn here.
And also the fact that it would take significant wasted effort to implement.
If PG did something like this, I'd lose all respect.
and what will people from other countries do?
HN itself? No
All the startups/sites that everyone on here runs? Absolutely
You don't even have to go 100% dark, you can just have a splash telling your users about SOPA. You need to realize
All the startups/sites that everyone on here runs? Absolutely
You don't even have to go 100% dark, you can just have a splash telling your users about SOPA. You need to realize
Show, don't tell.
For most viewers, just showing a notice explaining SOPA will be too abstract. Shutting down your site or service, while putting up a notice, has a higher chance of bringing the point home.
For most viewers, just showing a notice explaining SOPA will be too abstract. Shutting down your site or service, while putting up a notice, has a higher chance of bringing the point home.
I think you got it backwards. Just displaying a notice is "telling." Actually shutting down is "showing" by doing.
In case it wasn't clear from my previous post: we're in agreement. Show, by taking content and services down. Tell, by putting up an explanation of SOPA and what folks can do to stop it.
Perhaps on that day, HN blacks out all normal content and instead just features a list of all the sites that have gone black in protest? Could let users submit URLs to be added to the list.
Agree with that. Besides featuring the list of sites gone black in protest, HN could also display pointers to effects of SOPA (for non-regular HN visitors), contact info for Congress representatives.
[deleted]
The only reason I would say "NO" is because I'll miss HN for the day. That being said, it's the right thing to do. There needs to be solidarity shown throughout all web companies. It's the only way to win.
Between the "preaching to the choir" and "solidarity" arguments, I basically come out even. But I think HN, being fairly low-profile to mainstreamers and very much full of our SOPA-fearing choir, could serve as the place that we can rely on to continue having an intelligent conversation w/r/t SOPA while everything else is blacked out.
I've seen a lot of people argue that sites like Hacker News shouldn't engage in a protest like this on the grounds that most of its audience probably already supports the protest's cause. I think this is a fundamentally flawed view about the nature of protesting.
It is without question that the most effective protests are those that have direct impacts on the opposition and its supporters, but protesting is bigger than that. It is about trying to be heard just as much as it is about being heard. It is about speaking your mind and standing behind things you believe in even when your protest may fall on deaf ears.
For that reason, the overwhelming amount of people within the Hacker News community that oppose SOPA is the perfect reason TO join in the protest.
I would miss Hacker News for the day, but I would take great pride in being a part of a community that stands up for what it believes in.
It is without question that the most effective protests are those that have direct impacts on the opposition and its supporters, but protesting is bigger than that. It is about trying to be heard just as much as it is about being heard. It is about speaking your mind and standing behind things you believe in even when your protest may fall on deaf ears.
For that reason, the overwhelming amount of people within the Hacker News community that oppose SOPA is the perfect reason TO join in the protest.
I would miss Hacker News for the day, but I would take great pride in being a part of a community that stands up for what it believes in.
It's a symbolic gesture. I believe this leads to a fundamental question of whether it's essential to the kind of political movement we represent.
So for instance democrats depend on notion of symbolic representation to ground their concept of political representation. Without the former, the latter becomes vacuous.
"What kind of advantage does it give us?" seems to be the question. Perhaps it's a moral boost? In the political game, it technically says nothing. In perhaps our own schema of doing things, it technically says nothing. But the idea that people use these tools and can intentionally limit themselves (like with Freedom, the app that locks yr Internet connection) to represent freedom.
So for instance democrats depend on notion of symbolic representation to ground their concept of political representation. Without the former, the latter becomes vacuous.
"What kind of advantage does it give us?" seems to be the question. Perhaps it's a moral boost? In the political game, it technically says nothing. In perhaps our own schema of doing things, it technically says nothing. But the idea that people use these tools and can intentionally limit themselves (like with Freedom, the app that locks yr Internet connection) to represent freedom.
Something to consider - if HN doesn't go dark it may become a refugee camp for a good chunk of bored reddit users (c. 70m daily pageviews), which could lead to a radical change in HN's userbase.
Good to support, too.
Good to support, too.
I'm afraid.
Isn't HN becoming enough like Reddit already with the kind of stories that are posted? Last thing we need are the redditors then it's Reddit 2.0.
"If your account is less than a year old, please don't submit comments saying that HN is turning into Reddit. (It's a common semi-noob illusion.)"
http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
http://jacquesmattheij.com/The+Unofficial+HN+FAQ#shark
http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
http://jacquesmattheij.com/The+Unofficial+HN+FAQ#shark
Okay.
My account is plenty old, and HN is most certainly seeing a lot more reddit-like posts. Honestly I think the downturn started about the time we lost the ability to see comment points in threads.
I think dropping the comment points was a reaction to the downturn.
My account is plenty old, and HN is most certainly seeing a lot more reddit-like posts. Honestly I think the downturn started about the time we lost the ability to see comment points in threads.
I think dropping the comment points was a reaction to the downturn.
Do you honestly believe what you wrote here? You see marginal difference between reddit and HN?
On the other hand - publicity gained by going dark along with reddit would raise the amount of people who were aware of HN and could cause more people to come here.
Either way, I don't think it's that big of a concern.
Either way, I don't think it's that big of a concern.
I think the effect of people being aware of HN would be quite different from that of HN being available whilst reddit wasn't. Essentially HN is not as 'good' at doing what reddit does (because it's not meant to), so increased awareness isn't likely to shift people from reddit. Take away reddit and things change. It will be interesting to see the effect on the web without reddit for a day. With no serious Digg these days, HN would be high on the list of alternatives (even though it is not aimed as such), and there will no doubt be a lot of SOPA posting that day.
"publicity gained by going dark along with reddit would raise the amount of people who were aware of HN and could cause more people to come here."
I know it's elitist, but I have no wish for this community to get exponentially larger.
I know it's elitist, but I have no wish for this community to get exponentially larger.
I love how there's an unwritten rule to never talk about HN on Reddit. I never even saw it mentioned, and myself try to avoid mentioning it while I see talks about Reddit and proof that a lot of HNers are former redditors almost daily on this site.
I like the solidarity angle. I think that it would be great if there was information about how HNers could use their voice to affect change. Similar to how americancensorship.org gives visitors instructions on how to do something about it.
No because anyone who already reads HN already knows SOPA. The only thing that will be effective is if sites that normal non-tech people visit go dark.
Going dark's is not only about being informative.
Is more valuable than that.
To the eyes of history, you have symbolic value in participating of a protest.
People will talk about what you did or did not in historically important (game changer) times.
So is all about how do you want them to talk about you in relation to this?
Is more valuable than that.
To the eyes of history, you have symbolic value in participating of a protest.
People will talk about what you did or did not in historically important (game changer) times.
So is all about how do you want them to talk about you in relation to this?
Personally, I don't think the "eyes of history" will care much what whether or not HN went dark for the purpose of symbolic value. These statements of yours seem to apply better to group demonstrations of the more traditional variety.
I agree that HN we ought to be willing to go dark, (insofar as HN is a leader of anything) but still vote no on the grounds that it will be a meaningless gesture. Leaders should be willing to sacrifice as they ask from others, that doesn't mean it's helpful in every situation.
ps. I may be biased. I've never been very big on symbolic value.
I agree that HN we ought to be willing to go dark, (insofar as HN is a leader of anything) but still vote no on the grounds that it will be a meaningless gesture. Leaders should be willing to sacrifice as they ask from others, that doesn't mean it's helpful in every situation.
ps. I may be biased. I've never been very big on symbolic value.
HN is a group of people (before anything else). If you underestimate yourself or your people, then you are doing a favor to the establishment that wants you and your people to stay invisible.
Think it from different points of view.
For example: if HN goes down, it could be a fact noticeable for a journalist's investigation. With luck, it could become a paragraph in a New York Times article about this subject.
You can more influential than you are thinking.
Think it from different points of view.
For example: if HN goes down, it could be a fact noticeable for a journalist's investigation. With luck, it could become a paragraph in a New York Times article about this subject.
You can more influential than you are thinking.
Now I want to change my vote ...
Agreed. I'm all for raising awareness, but many of the articles surfacing here over the past few weeks have been SOPA related and taking down the whole site to put up one message may actually reduce the amount of SOPA/PIPA-related information people are reading.
For reference, all SOPA related articles on HN: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=SOPA
For reference, all SOPA related articles on HN: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=SOPA
Maybe instead of "going dark" that should be what the homepage redirects to for that day. That way it raises awareness and provides reading material.
I think it is safe to assume that everyone on HN is fully aware of SOPA by now.
Not about the other anti-Internet attempts. I hope that the Internet Freedom message is displayed broadly alongside support for the SOPA protest movement.
We can't ask "normal non-tech people" sites to go dark if we're not willing to ourselves. Even if few HNers will learn anything new it still sets a good example.
Making a public stand isn't just about using shock-and-awe to create an educational moment. It's also about making headlines and showing solidarity.
Despite the fact that the majority of HN readers already know about SOPA, I think it's an excellent idea for these other reasons.
It might also be an opportunity to get some of us off our butts and use the time we spend reading HN each day to call our representatives in congress instead.
Despite the fact that the majority of HN readers already know about SOPA, I think it's an excellent idea for these other reasons.
It might also be an opportunity to get some of us off our butts and use the time we spend reading HN each day to call our representatives in congress instead.
>Making a public stand isn't [...] [is] also about making headlines and showing solidarity.
So you think that HN being off for a few hours will make headlines in the worlds newspapers and on the main TV channels? Maybe as an "some tech websites were also offline [and nothing important was lost]" or maybe even (given the quality of some press) "other illegal hacking sites were down in protest against the bill".
I don't have a representative in congress but nonetheless expect congress is already pushing a similar law for my country.
I find the idea lacks any force as a demonstration.
So you think that HN being off for a few hours will make headlines in the worlds newspapers and on the main TV channels? Maybe as an "some tech websites were also offline [and nothing important was lost]" or maybe even (given the quality of some press) "other illegal hacking sites were down in protest against the bill".
I don't have a representative in congress but nonetheless expect congress is already pushing a similar law for my country.
I find the idea lacks any force as a demonstration.
No, I believe it will alter how the news media writes their story about the Reddit blackout. "Tech sites do blackout" vs "Wacky site shuts itself off for a day".
This is a very good point.
Reddit, HackerNews & SlashDot down = Tech sites blackout
Reddit down = Remember that website that we reported was full of pedophiles last month? ...
Reddit, HackerNews & SlashDot down = Tech sites blackout
Reddit down = Remember that website that we reported was full of pedophiles last month? ...
But where am I going to find the headlines?!
Agreed, shutting down a website that no one in congress reads, knows about, or would care about even if they knew seems pointless to me.
If you want to have real effect continue (or start) to write your congress-person, educate your friends, and pressure them into doing the same. Post on Facebook, twitter, etc.
Compared to these real actions, shutting down HN is useless pageantry.
If you want to have real effect continue (or start) to write your congress-person, educate your friends, and pressure them into doing the same. Post on Facebook, twitter, etc.
Compared to these real actions, shutting down HN is useless pageantry.
I agree with you regarding the fact that no one in congress reads HN, however, I do believe that many people from very big companies (including Google, Facebook, Yahoo, etc) do spend time on HN.
Perhaps "going dark" can help encourage said companies to show support - in a similar way that the Reddit post has triggered this post.
Perhaps "going dark" can help encourage said companies to show support - in a similar way that the Reddit post has triggered this post.
It's not about HN users. It's so HN users can say to other people, see this forum of entrepreneurs is offline in protest.
And how better to convince Google, Facebook, twitter, etc. to join us on a blackout or at least a "blackout" than by _all_ of us being a part of it and spreading the word as best we can?
Yeah, and do your best to shut everything else on the internet down too.
Is it just me or when I read "dark", my instinct is to think "down." More likely it will probably be replaced with something SOPA-related, may be even interactive? So net, we'll still probably be here, just as engaged, but focused on this one thing for a day. All of a sudden this doesn't sound too bad nor meaningless.
Why is shutting down considered a good method of protest. Why not just donate money to the political opponents of those who support SOPA? SOPA is about money, not about public opinion.
Because people vote for the politicians in power. If they want to get re-elected, they need to follow what their voters want. At least, that's the idea. Plus, it adds shame to the politician if he supports something that his constituents hate. For people filled with the pride of being a politician, some good old-fashioned shame could work wonders.
Politicians and large corporations spend money to shape public opinion. People, when united, can change public opinion without spending a dime. Politicians and large corporations are given power by the public.
Because the law-makers in the USA are really going to be concerned that a website they have never heard of, frequented by a community of people who probably don't donate too much into their campaign pockets, has gone 'off the air'...
Right... go for it...
Right... go for it...
Let's make the headlines read: "Hundreds of the largest web sites went black today in protest of SOPA" The more black sites, the more powerful the message. It really needs to be pervasive, and it can't be limited to just tech companies.
I'm all for solidarity, symbolism, awareness, etc. but even though you and I and everyone who has ever caused more than two requests from this server knows that "Hacker News" has nothing to do with illegitimate activities, I'm just scared that our technologically-challenged Congressional representatives will hear about us and get the vague idea that "hackers are blacking out the Internet cuz they don't like this anti-piracy bill".
HN should go dark to protest SOPA. Its all about sending THE message. Every bit helps and this gesture from HN will go a long way.
Anyone else think the 5 year PRISON sentence SOPA is proposing is just a tad hefty? lil bit?
HN is a very small group of people. Its not worth the blackout. Infact we need it to be up to keep ourselves updated on that day.
Instead, create labels [the mailing labels] named 'Stop SOPA' that can be stuck on our shirts. That'll create some awareness and easy to distribute.
Instead, create labels [the mailing labels] named 'Stop SOPA' that can be stuck on our shirts. That'll create some awareness and easy to distribute.
I don't think it's true that everyone who browses HN knows everything about SOPA. Sure everyone who reads a chunk of articles daily and comments knowns all about it and are agreeing amongst themselves that everyone knows. I think there would be a massive long tail of busy people, occasional lurkers and those that are new to stuff covered by HN or it's only a hobby.
I voted yes.
But I think HN should populate the days articles with tongue-in-cheek titles like:
The article titled "New start-up to disrupt <INSERT SOPA SUPPORTER HERE> business model" has been taken down to SOPA compliance concerns.
and,
"All hail our mighty overlord: <INSERT SOPA SUPPORTER HERE>"
and,
"The failure of democracy and the rise of corporatism! Would you like to know more?"
But I think HN should populate the days articles with tongue-in-cheek titles like:
The article titled "New start-up to disrupt <INSERT SOPA SUPPORTER HERE> business model" has been taken down to SOPA compliance concerns.
and,
"All hail our mighty overlord: <INSERT SOPA SUPPORTER HERE>"
and,
"The failure of democracy and the rise of corporatism! Would you like to know more?"
Definitely. If we can't even bite the bullet ourselves, how can we expect others to as well? This isn't about HN, this is greater than that. This is about freedom of life as we know it. Without freedom of information, there is no such thing as freedom period. HN going down would be a powerful display of protest and commitment to freedom. Possibly, even the greatest thing HN has ever done.
No. Despite the statement that will be made by HN were it to go dark, this should be done on a website that gets traffic from the general population that is not aware of the situation. Most people on HN know about SOPA, where as most people on FB, Google or Tumblr don't.
Should HN go dark? Yes! Would it be effective? No!
Should HN go dark? Yes! Would it be effective? No!
You make symbolic gestures because ... they're symbolic.
They're going to be recognized directly by those who utilize whatever it is that's being sacrificed.
And more widely, reporting on the issue (because that's where the symbolism hits the road, so to speak), is going to take note that "demonstrating support and solidarity with the anti-SOPA movement, numerous websites, including <list here> went dark for the day". For HN to be in that list will add to its weight. At least somewhat.
And, well, we're all talking about this. Here on HN. Go do something useful and have this debate elsewhere.
Hrm: Perhaps I should petition Krell Power Systems to go dark in support. But man is that power-up sequence a pain afterwards.
You know what? It's still worth it.
They're going to be recognized directly by those who utilize whatever it is that's being sacrificed.
And more widely, reporting on the issue (because that's where the symbolism hits the road, so to speak), is going to take note that "demonstrating support and solidarity with the anti-SOPA movement, numerous websites, including <list here> went dark for the day". For HN to be in that list will add to its weight. At least somewhat.
And, well, we're all talking about this. Here on HN. Go do something useful and have this debate elsewhere.
Hrm: Perhaps I should petition Krell Power Systems to go dark in support. But man is that power-up sequence a pain afterwards.
You know what? It's still worth it.
It's whistling in the dark.
The people who know about SOPA, or should know about SOPA, don't frequent HN. They use Google and Facebook.
The people who are in charge of legislating SOPA, or voting on it, are similarly not effected. I think Wikipedia should black out each legislator's page with a big "SOPA WILL CENSOR THE INTERNET" notice. That will get the attention of the 6 o'clock news more than some evil hacker news site doing a "protest". After all, what senator's ego could bear having their Wikipedia page defaced?
The people who know about SOPA, or should know about SOPA, don't frequent HN. They use Google and Facebook.
The people who are in charge of legislating SOPA, or voting on it, are similarly not effected. I think Wikipedia should black out each legislator's page with a big "SOPA WILL CENSOR THE INTERNET" notice. That will get the attention of the 6 o'clock news more than some evil hacker news site doing a "protest". After all, what senator's ego could bear having their Wikipedia page defaced?
I say Yay...
Protests are heard the loudest when more people join them. I get that us being down isn't quite as informative to the public as say, facebook going down or google dropping out for a day but as other have already stated if we join others are more likely to follow.
It's the classic timid group effect (I doubt that's what it's actually called.) You know, when there are ten people being asked to volunteer an answer to a question, and no one answers until that one guy raises his hand, then suddenly everyone else has something to say. We need to be part of the first, not for us but to get others to throw their voices (or in this case, 0's and 1's.) behind the cause.
Protests are heard the loudest when more people join them. I get that us being down isn't quite as informative to the public as say, facebook going down or google dropping out for a day but as other have already stated if we join others are more likely to follow.
It's the classic timid group effect (I doubt that's what it's actually called.) You know, when there are ten people being asked to volunteer an answer to a question, and no one answers until that one guy raises his hand, then suddenly everyone else has something to say. We need to be part of the first, not for us but to get others to throw their voices (or in this case, 0's and 1's.) behind the cause.
If only because the effort has to approach the magnitude of all or nothing, otherwise it will likely be fruitless.
As usual, I should have read the comments before voting. I voted No because everyone here is already against SOPA, but I see that it can be about more than that.
No. I like the exclusion from HN consideration policy better. Has longer-lasting ramifications to it.
I wanted to vote no, because it seems so Pyrrhic, maybe a little gimmicky: "See, we shut down a site you don't use!"
But if you're asking people to make a sacrifice you're not willing to make yourself, you're a bad leader, period. I'm not saying HN is the bastion of the tech world. But if we're upvoting the Reddit shutdown (at least I did), and we can't turn around and do it ourselves, well, we're not made of very tough stuff after all.
But if you're asking people to make a sacrifice you're not willing to make yourself, you're a bad leader, period. I'm not saying HN is the bastion of the tech world. But if we're upvoting the Reddit shutdown (at least I did), and we can't turn around and do it ourselves, well, we're not made of very tough stuff after all.
I see your point, but disagree. I think it makes a lot more sense for HN to do whatever HN believes is the most effective thing, rather than do what reddit did.
I see it as fake work. We would being doing something ineffective to prove a point and distracting from something potentially more useful (which may or may not also prove that point).
I see it as fake work. We would being doing something ineffective to prove a point and distracting from something potentially more useful (which may or may not also prove that point).
HN needs to be "follower #1". This is how a movement and momentum is built.
(http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movemen...)
(http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movemen...)
There are many other sites that will black out, not just HN... Reddit itself is follower #50 or so.
And you believe the most effective thing it can do is...?
I want to know how the press, politicians, corps, individuals, the internet 'community' all are responding. Without Hacker News up I don't think I'll be well informed.
I vote for no shutdown.
I vote for no shutdown.
I voted 'no' but I think Hacker News is driven by fads to a degree - you see one story on the site, then a few hours later there's a load of others with slightly different views. A few hours/days/weeks later, all is forgotten.
So 'yes' will win. It may happen. Few people will remember it a year from now.
So 'yes' will win. It may happen. Few people will remember it a year from now.
You make a great point and I changed my vote because of this. Thanks for being a voice of reason.
I too agree with your view point. While it may seem like it would be a loss, it may be a first step in getting larger sites on board. It would seem impossible for sites like TechCrunch not to cover a Reedit blackout, as well as HN. If more momentum is gained perhaps the attention of congress could be reached and we can feel like we stood together.
I agree with you and although I am not U.S. citizen and I read HN several times a day (so it will be a hard day without it) I give you full support in this action. Just go ahead and fight!
Pragmatically speaking, maybe YC could come up with a statement threatening to move businesses outside the US to circumvent some of the provisions of the law. Shutting down HN - i doubt any congressman is in here to notice. In any case i could use a daily detoxification, so yes.
p.s. Pyrrhic is not the right word, maybe futile
p.s. Pyrrhic is not the right word, maybe futile
The expression "Pyrrhic victory" is also used to describe a triumph of little consequence. I'd say the way GP used it is correct. If you unroot a tree in a forest with your bare hands, but there's no one around to see it, will you get applause?
Edit: Blah, I couldn't find any sources to back up my earlier statement. It's just how I've often used the phrase. My bad, I stand corrected.
Edit: Blah, I couldn't find any sources to back up my earlier statement. It's just how I've often used the phrase. My bad, I stand corrected.
Wikipedia summarizes it well:
A Pyrrhic victory (/ˈpɪrɪk/) is a victory with such a devastating cost to the victor that it carries the implication that another such victory will ultimately cause defeat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory
A Pyrrhic victory (/ˈpɪrɪk/) is a victory with such a devastating cost to the victor that it carries the implication that another such victory will ultimately cause defeat.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrrhic_victory
Here's a source to back up your "little consequence" use of pyrrhic...
http://gyazo.com/7ac0551554255bd91bac6600ad9b9647
http://gyazo.com/7ac0551554255bd91bac6600ad9b9647
the point isnt, necessarily, to block sites the congressmen use; the point is to get enough people angry so that they call their respective congressman
threatening to move businesses outside the US
This should be investigated more by tech companies. Perhaps US policymakers will sit up and listen then
This should be investigated more by tech companies. Perhaps US policymakers will sit up and listen then
I don't think it's gimmicky at all. There's a very real threat that SOPA or whatever comes after that will de juro or de facto allow old media to end the internet as we know it.
Blacking out sites ahead of that only helps illustrate to people the harm the law will do.
Blacking out sites ahead of that only helps illustrate to people the harm the law will do.
That's only true if you illustrate the harm to people who aren't already aware of it. I contend that almost everyone who visits HN is already aware of said harm. Thus blacking out HN will have limited impact.
There are different types of awareness though. Having your homepage actually shut down for a day is completely different than understanding something at the intellectual level.
I say come january 18th HN should either black out, or focus discussion on SOPA entirely in solidarity with reddit.
HN is a niche community with members who have a much greater capacity to influence the outcome of SOPA than a general populace. In some sense, a black out would inhibit the community's ability to affect change with respect to the issue.
If every active member of HN pledged to spend their available resources on the 18th towards working on SOPA, I suspect the outcome could have effects reaching further than even the championed reddit black out.
It's mostly a matter of deciding to place our money where our mouths are and collaborating effectively.
HN is a niche community with members who have a much greater capacity to influence the outcome of SOPA than a general populace. In some sense, a black out would inhibit the community's ability to affect change with respect to the issue.
If every active member of HN pledged to spend their available resources on the 18th towards working on SOPA, I suspect the outcome could have effects reaching further than even the championed reddit black out.
It's mostly a matter of deciding to place our money where our mouths are and collaborating effectively.
I'm for shutting it down.... but...
I suspect there is a strong correlation between IE users and people who don't know about SOPA... So maybe HN should "Shutdown" the IE user agent...?
I suspect there is a strong correlation between IE users and people who don't know about SOPA... So maybe HN should "Shutdown" the IE user agent...?
If HN going dark can inspire other popular sites to go dark too, then it would be great. Otherwise, we'll just have a tree falling in the forest situation.
I understand the solidarity point, but we need results here. The aim is to stop SOPA, not just protest against it in a private corner of the internet.
I understand the solidarity point, but we need results here. The aim is to stop SOPA, not just protest against it in a private corner of the internet.
No, you raise your voice not go dark in protest
A blackout would suck because I love checking HN throughout the day.
That's exactly why we should have the blackout, because that's a small taste of the nonsense that could come from SOPA in relation to many other sites we all check daily.
That's exactly why we should have the blackout, because that's a small taste of the nonsense that could come from SOPA in relation to many other sites we all check daily.
Absolutely. HN's effectively dead if SOPA passes. I know that there aren't a lot of SOPA supporters that use it, but as I said elsewhere, the point of a blackout isn't to punish supporters - it's to motivate people to get involved against SOPA. If your favorite site is inaccessible in protest of SOPA, it might get you more involved in fighting it, which is the whole point.
> HN's effectively dead if SOPA passes
How so? I'm having trouble recalling offhand anything posted to HN that would cause HN to run into SOPA trouble.
How so? I'm having trouble recalling offhand anything posted to HN that would cause HN to run into SOPA trouble.
Say someone posts a link to a website that shows a technical description of how to crack some form of DRM, which is something a good portion of the HN audience would be interested in. One of the companies that use that DRM could get HN shut down.
I don't see how. The meat of SOPA is sections 102 and 103. Section 102 only applies to foreign sites so is not applicable.
Section 103 applies to any site, foreign or domestic, that is a site "dedicated to the theft of US property". What it means to be "dedicated to the theft of US property" is defined in 103(a)(1), and can be found here at loc.gov: http://tinyurl.com/3lvuqc4
(I used tinyurl.com because the real URL ends in a colon, and HN seems to have trouble with that).
It certainly doesn't appear on first reading that HN would fall under this. The worst it appears this would do to HN is cause some hassle if content owners filed false notifications that HN had to waste time replying to. However, 103(b)(6) makes knowingly misrepresenting that a site is "dedicated to the theft of US property" in such a notice subject the filer to liability for damages and attorney's fees.
I haven't been through the whole bill, so maybe there is some other section that would put HN at risk?
edit: changed link to higher up in the bill. The link to the specific section was only good for 30 minutes.
Section 103 applies to any site, foreign or domestic, that is a site "dedicated to the theft of US property". What it means to be "dedicated to the theft of US property" is defined in 103(a)(1), and can be found here at loc.gov: http://tinyurl.com/3lvuqc4
(I used tinyurl.com because the real URL ends in a colon, and HN seems to have trouble with that).
It certainly doesn't appear on first reading that HN would fall under this. The worst it appears this would do to HN is cause some hassle if content owners filed false notifications that HN had to waste time replying to. However, 103(b)(6) makes knowingly misrepresenting that a site is "dedicated to the theft of US property" in such a notice subject the filer to liability for damages and attorney's fees.
I haven't been through the whole bill, so maybe there is some other section that would put HN at risk?
edit: changed link to higher up in the bill. The link to the specific section was only good for 30 minutes.
The grammar is exceedingly thick and difficult to parse, but if you look closely, you'll see:
"the U.S.-directed site...enables or facilitates (a violation of USC Title 17, section 501 and section 1201/ title 17; loosely, the copyright infringement code and copyright protection circumvention code)"
Basically, what this means is that if the core functionality of your site even enables copyright infringment (by, say, submitting links to infringing content, or posting copyrighted content in comment threads like this one), the site is an infringing site. The language doesn't require that you be dedicated to copyright infringement. All it requires is that your core functionality enable it. HN, by any stretch of the imagination, falls under that category. While you and I look at that and say "Oh, that's obviously not meant to target HN", the law doesn't work that way. The language says "if you have a comment box, you're at risk of being labeled an "Internet site is dedicated to theft of U.S. property".
Additionally, you may be labeled "infringing" if you take "deliberate actions to avoid confirming a high probability" of copyright infringement; that is, if you make the deliberate decision that it's not cost-effective to screen every comment posted to your site, then you may be painted as "dedicated to theft".
Because I can post "46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2" on Hacker News, it can be argued that its core functionality enables violations of US Code Section 1202, Title 17, and therefore, under SOPA, Hacker News would legally be guilty of being a "Internet site is dedicated to theft of U.S. property".
The "qualifying plaintiff" portions basically give the copyright holders the right to pull the trigger on most any site on which their content shows up on, even if the site isn't "dedicated" to infringement, just so long as the site's core functionality makes it possible to infringe.
"the U.S.-directed site...enables or facilitates (a violation of USC Title 17, section 501 and section 1201/ title 17; loosely, the copyright infringement code and copyright protection circumvention code)"
Basically, what this means is that if the core functionality of your site even enables copyright infringment (by, say, submitting links to infringing content, or posting copyrighted content in comment threads like this one), the site is an infringing site. The language doesn't require that you be dedicated to copyright infringement. All it requires is that your core functionality enable it. HN, by any stretch of the imagination, falls under that category. While you and I look at that and say "Oh, that's obviously not meant to target HN", the law doesn't work that way. The language says "if you have a comment box, you're at risk of being labeled an "Internet site is dedicated to theft of U.S. property".
Additionally, you may be labeled "infringing" if you take "deliberate actions to avoid confirming a high probability" of copyright infringement; that is, if you make the deliberate decision that it's not cost-effective to screen every comment posted to your site, then you may be painted as "dedicated to theft".
Because I can post "46 DC EA D3 17 FE 45 D8 09 23 EB 97 E4 95 64 10 D4 CD B2 C2" on Hacker News, it can be argued that its core functionality enables violations of US Code Section 1202, Title 17, and therefore, under SOPA, Hacker News would legally be guilty of being a "Internet site is dedicated to theft of U.S. property".
The "qualifying plaintiff" portions basically give the copyright holders the right to pull the trigger on most any site on which their content shows up on, even if the site isn't "dedicated" to infringement, just so long as the site's core functionality makes it possible to infringe.
Here's how 103(a)(1)(A)(B)(i) starts:
All three of the branches have conditions that would not apply to HN. The first requires that the site be primarily designed or operated for the purpose of enabling or facilitating infringement. That's not the case for HN.
The second does not have an intent requirement, but requires that the site has only limited purpose or use aside form infringing. Again, that does not apply to HN.
The third requires that HN be marketed as offering goods and services to aid infringement. I don't think it has ever been so marketed.
Your point on "deliberate actions to avoid confirming a high probability" of infringement looks interesting. That one may be a problem.
the U.S.-directed site is primarily designed
or operated for the purpose of, has only limited
purpose or use other than, or is marketed by its
operator or another acting in concert with that
operator for use in, offering goods or services in
a manner that engages in, enables, or facilitates--
the U.S.-directed site is primarily designed or
operated for the purpose of offering goods or
services in a manner that engages in,
enables, or facilitates--
the U.S.-directed site has only limited purpose
or use other than offering goods or services in
a manner that engages in, enables, or facilitates--
the U.S.-directed site is marketed by its operator
or another acting in concert with that operator for
use in offering goods or services in a manner that
engages in, enables, or facilitates--
All three of the branches have conditions that would not apply to HN. The first requires that the site be primarily designed or operated for the purpose of enabling or facilitating infringement. That's not the case for HN.
The second does not have an intent requirement, but requires that the site has only limited purpose or use aside form infringing. Again, that does not apply to HN.
The third requires that HN be marketed as offering goods and services to aid infringement. I don't think it has ever been so marketed.
Your point on "deliberate actions to avoid confirming a high probability" of infringement looks interesting. That one may be a problem.
I guess the vagueness of the language is why we have lawyers, but the way I read the first "or" clause, HN could be painted as infringing. It is primarily designed to offer services (link posting and comment discussion) that (happen to) enable copyright infringement (see the DVD key I posted above). It's not designed for the explicit purpose of enabling copyright infringement, but it is designed to offer a service that, by its nature, enable and facilitates copyright infringement, if users were to use it for such.
To paraphrase:
My understanding of it seems to be the thing that so many people have an issue with; the concern is that SOPA's loose language makes any content platform effectively illegal, giving the media cartels a sledgehammer that they can swing at just about anyone they please.
To paraphrase:
the U.S.-directed site is primarily designed for the
purpose of offering services that enable
copyright infringement.
My understanding of it seems to be the thing that so many people have an issue with; the concern is that SOPA's loose language makes any content platform effectively illegal, giving the media cartels a sledgehammer that they can swing at just about anyone they please.
Proving that someone knowingly misrepresented something is incredibly hard in the face of someone who'll just play dumb 'But your honor, the site is called "hacker news"'
The problem with SOPA is not so much what it'd accomplish if everyone used it with decent knowledge and in good faith, though there are issues with that too.
The biggest problem is largely what it enables people who act in bad faith or out of downright stupidity to achieve by shifting the burdens of proof and reducing judicial safeguards, while protecting these same people against any significant risks.
The problem with SOPA is not so much what it'd accomplish if everyone used it with decent knowledge and in good faith, though there are issues with that too.
The biggest problem is largely what it enables people who act in bad faith or out of downright stupidity to achieve by shifting the burdens of proof and reducing judicial safeguards, while protecting these same people against any significant risks.
Full Gameboy Color Emulator in Javascript
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3446871
It was on HN the other day.
http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3446871
It was on HN the other day.
Yes, so I can get some work done on the 18th (..and it makes a good statement from us as a community!)
When we talk about going dark we are talking about US viewers only right? I have no power to change SOPA so there is no point protesting to me.
This bill will not just affect those of us who live in the US. And there's not really any reason you can't send letters to US representatives anyways. At worst they might ignore them. Or, you can contact your country's ambassador to the US and ask them to weigh in on the matter.
These actions might not have any effect, but it's better than just throwing your hands up in the air.
These actions might not have any effect, but it's better than just throwing your hands up in the air.
I proudly join my fellow protesters in the US, despite living elsewhere. The ideals they defend are mine and I stand by their side.
Shouldn't we be secretly hoping it will pass so that these big US companies will have to move their operations overseas to our countries?
Bad legislation is contagious.
Yes because a lot of wealthy people visit Hacker News. Angels, VCs, startup founders, hackers who had good exits, etc. If politics are owned by wealthy corporations and individuals, then let's throw some money against SOPA.
Do you guys not remember the blue ribbon campaign?
The practice is to blacken your page. Force someone to read a "WTF IS THIS ABOUT?" and then pass them through to your usual service (still themed in black)
The practice is to blacken your page. Force someone to read a "WTF IS THIS ABOUT?" and then pass them through to your usual service (still themed in black)
We should also consider the media message we'd be sending to the uninformed. A site called Hacker News opposes SOPA; what do you think the average person's response to that would be?
Frankly I think that HN is the wrong vehicle to bring attention to the matter strictly from a marketing/outreach perspective.
However, YC is a great channel to carry this message, and PG has already taken a very public stance on the issue.
Frankly I think that HN is the wrong vehicle to bring attention to the matter strictly from a marketing/outreach perspective.
However, YC is a great channel to carry this message, and PG has already taken a very public stance on the issue.
Personally, I think this co-option of "hacker" to mean "semi-technical entrepreneur" is at best silly, and at worst leads to the sort of confusion of which you speak. Personally, I thought the hacker dojo should have been called "The Mountain View Computer Club" - it's got a nice retro feel. I mean, I'm a member, and I like the place, the people, and the organisation, but the name is unfortunate.
I think this is a separate discussion from reclaiming "hacker" to mean "technologist" - Hacker news is about semi-technical entrepreneurs, and we are rather different from people of similar technical skill levels that are not entrepreneurial. That's an important distinction. I mean, I introduce myself as "the tall guy" as a reference to "Every technical business has a tall dumb guy and a short smart guy." - It would be useful, I think, to have a word for 'semi-technical business guy" because while my compatriots could also call themselves hackers, I usually act in the semi-technical business guy role. (I mean, outside of my peer group, I'm a semi-business technical guy of unremarkable height- obviously, this is a continuum.)
I think this is a separate discussion from reclaiming "hacker" to mean "technologist" - Hacker news is about semi-technical entrepreneurs, and we are rather different from people of similar technical skill levels that are not entrepreneurial. That's an important distinction. I mean, I introduce myself as "the tall guy" as a reference to "Every technical business has a tall dumb guy and a short smart guy." - It would be useful, I think, to have a word for 'semi-technical business guy" because while my compatriots could also call themselves hackers, I usually act in the semi-technical business guy role. (I mean, outside of my peer group, I'm a semi-business technical guy of unremarkable height- obviously, this is a continuum.)
This is kind of off topic but imho "everyone else" coopted hacker away from those of us who consider ourselves hackers.
And for the record I don't consider semi-technical entrepreneur to be the definition of hacker I apply to myself. For me it's more about someone who can take two things and make something new with them, regardless if they should be able to or not.
In any case, its a form of cultural identity, so its up to those who identify with it to define it. If the mainstream doesn't recognize it, its our responsibility to fix that.
And for the record I don't consider semi-technical entrepreneur to be the definition of hacker I apply to myself. For me it's more about someone who can take two things and make something new with them, regardless if they should be able to or not.
In any case, its a form of cultural identity, so its up to those who identify with it to define it. If the mainstream doesn't recognize it, its our responsibility to fix that.
>And for the record I don't consider semi-technical entrepreneur to be the definition of hacker I apply to myself. For me it's more about someone who can take two things and make something new with them, regardless if they should be able to or not.
Do you see the distinction I am trying to make, though? and how the crowd here, people that are interested in both business and technical problems is different from the sort of person that is only interested in technical problems, and why making that distinction would be useful?
Do you see the distinction I am trying to make, though? and how the crowd here, people that are interested in both business and technical problems is different from the sort of person that is only interested in technical problems, and why making that distinction would be useful?
I'd love if Cloudflare had a No-SOPA switch I could easily set to make my site go dark when the day comes. I am sure others will want it too.
Anyone from Cloudflare here?
Anyone from Cloudflare here?
Why not? Worst case, the productivity of the global tech industry spikes for 24 hours. Plus, lead from the front and all that.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and that point about the reddit refugees. Yeah.
EDIT2: and then we can have haskell day on the 19th or something as well. sweet.
EDIT: Oh yeah, and that point about the reddit refugees. Yeah.
EDIT2: and then we can have haskell day on the 19th or something as well. sweet.
Personally, I think such a thing would serve no purpose other than to make people on HN feel as though they've contributed something. I think it would be better for the fight against SOPA if everyone who voted yes wrote their congressperson instead (not to imply that they necessarily haven't, mind you).
Does anyone who reads HN not already know about the evils of SOPA?
My goto quip for these sorts of things is Carlin's "I leave symbols to the symbol-minded." HN can do whatever it wants, I voted No purely out of self-interest but if the site goes dark I'll just do a bit more work than normal. Even if all the major sites go dark I'm not convinced it will have any lasting effect.
Since Turkey has its own SOPA for years, these kind of debates happened a couple of years ago. One of the ways is to show a page with the message and let the users continue to regular site if they choose to. http://techcrunch.com/2008/08/17/web-censorship-is-so-bad-in...
The word "hacker" has a highly negative connotation to the mass media. This site may as well be called "Terrorist News" from their POV. The last thing our SOPA opposition needs is to be associated with "hackers" in the popular press. For that reason I vote No.
First, construct a phase 1-blackout. Where any users sees a large screen with info to contact their reps (and then allows them to proceed to the app).
The outcome of this less-abrasive approach may be enough - and if not, Plan B can then be implemented; a complete blackout.
The outcome of this less-abrasive approach may be enough - and if not, Plan B can then be implemented; a complete blackout.
What if all companies in the YC family were to do something on January 18?
Only in the US. We’re pretty powerless in other countries, except for signing that White House petition.
pg, if you're going to blackout, could you try advocating Internet Freedom alongside going dark against the SOPA as a way to show HN wishing to have Internet Freedom to do business?
It would also show that there's a technologically advanced audience here that has great concerns of the anti-Internet attempts.
It would also show that there's a technologically advanced audience here that has great concerns of the anti-Internet attempts.
I think our blackout says more if we ask for just one thing.
We're a sophisticated audience though; the audience here will read more into it. The audience of Reddit, Facebook, Google, etc, are unlikely and may get overwhelmed.
Just black it out forever, that'll show 'em
At the very least, make a very visible note of it - change the background to black and include a top bar with some information/links on the matter.
It might still have an effect that sites, small or not, are all affected, so the long tail so to speak can have its own effect.
Something similar was brought up at reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/SOPA/comments/obl5l/ask_rsopa_is_the....
It might still have an effect that sites, small or not, are all affected, so the long tail so to speak can have its own effect.
Something similar was brought up at reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/SOPA/comments/obl5l/ask_rsopa_is_the....
I do think HN should go dark in SOPA - but I also think everyone on HN who controls a site should commit to make it go dark too.
No. I think the tech industry should learn how congress works and beat these fuckers at their own game.
Every single person that reads HN should talk in person to two people that don't read HN and explain SOPA/PIPA and why
they should contact congres and complain about SOPA/PIPA.
Phone calls and letters are better than email.
This is gonna be such a fun experiment with what happens when a country can't use a gigantic, shared distraction.
Paint it black!
Yes. This will be the most productive day of the week.
Yes.
If HN goes dark it accomplishes nothing. If anything should be done, we should promote and post hacker news in an effort to increase awareness. Closing HN which is a source of real factual and crowd sourced news is like cutting off vaccines durin an epicemic...
The point isn't to educate HN users about why SOPA sucks, it's to throw a roadblock in front of people and say "rather than spending the usual 10 minutes reading posts, pick up your phone and call your representative and complain"
It's about forcing people to get off their lazy butts and make a phone call. And as much as we complain, I bet 99% of people here haven't made that call yet.
It's about forcing people to get off their lazy butts and make a phone call. And as much as we complain, I bet 99% of people here haven't made that call yet.
No. The whole point of going dark is to raise public awareness and to get politicians to take this issue seriously. Unlike the general population, we don't need a wake up call.
Nothing like a blackout will get visitors to sit up and take notice.
Blackout for justice.
Blackout for justice.
I voted yes, but both options have similar outcomes. The front page will be full of stories about sites that have gone dark. The impact on HN will be the same, but attention will be driven to other blackouts.
I'm not following SOAP very much, so this would bring some more attention to it for me (I'm not American).
I think it would be important that any blackout actually includes a call to action though, not just a message saying the site is offline for today - it should make it easy to actually do something (email, phone call, whatever) to protest against it.
I think it would be important that any blackout actually includes a call to action though, not just a message saying the site is offline for today - it should make it easy to actually do something (email, phone call, whatever) to protest against it.
go dark my good friends
Yes, HN Should go dark to protest SOPA
Voted no. I think we here all know. The bigger issue is, did the tens of thousands of us call our senators and congressmen and tell them what we think. We can try to make news headlines all we want, but their phones are ringing off the hook will cause a much bigger disruption. If you want action here it is. Please.
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_c...
http://www.house.gov/representatives/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_c...
Maybe an HN blackout won't directly raise awareness, since you can't really be an HN participant and not know about SOPA. But having another site join the blackout may help raise exposure among those who run other websites, so it may help expand the blackout to other sites whose absence will be noticed by the people who need to know about SOPA.
No b/c the people to convince are not the ones reading HN
thats probably as preaching to the converted as you can get.
The only guaranteed outcomes of a blackout are:
1) site owners forego potential revenue that day 2) customers cannot do business with them that day 3) users cannot access those sites that day
Depending on which sites participate, the immediate effects on the lives of those owners, customers, and users can range from trivial to very meaningful.
Will this be a worthwhile "investment" in the long run?
I can believe that a blackout will increase media coverage. I can believe that a blackout will result in more calls, emails, etc. to representatives.
What's tough for me to believe is that any of that will do any good if the end goal is to stop this type of legislation. I would genuinely like to see evidence that similar protests have historically been effective.
Until then, I can't help but think this is just the wrong tactic that punishes the wrong people. I hope I'm wrong.
1) site owners forego potential revenue that day 2) customers cannot do business with them that day 3) users cannot access those sites that day
Depending on which sites participate, the immediate effects on the lives of those owners, customers, and users can range from trivial to very meaningful.
Will this be a worthwhile "investment" in the long run?
I can believe that a blackout will increase media coverage. I can believe that a blackout will result in more calls, emails, etc. to representatives.
What's tough for me to believe is that any of that will do any good if the end goal is to stop this type of legislation. I would genuinely like to see evidence that similar protests have historically been effective.
Until then, I can't help but think this is just the wrong tactic that punishes the wrong people. I hope I'm wrong.
I don't think it makes any sense to black out HN.
The purpose of the black out is to wake up people who have never heard of SOPA and educate them about the effects it will have on the Internet. It's not about some 'sacrifice' as some are calling it. It's the ultimate wake up call.
Rather, people of HN should black out their websites to get the message as far as possible. Let's keep HN up, so there's at least one place where we can stay somewhat organized and can keep track of things happening.
The purpose of the black out is to wake up people who have never heard of SOPA and educate them about the effects it will have on the Internet. It's not about some 'sacrifice' as some are calling it. It's the ultimate wake up call.
Rather, people of HN should black out their websites to get the message as far as possible. Let's keep HN up, so there's at least one place where we can stay somewhat organized and can keep track of things happening.
paint it black
We should do it solely to work on a project or get some work done. We know SOPA, but imagine the time!
Yes!
HN should blackout every Thursday as a "get more stuff done than usual day." (For this reason, Google has no-meeting Thursdays.)
No. Most HN users already oppose SOPA. Better to keep HN running so we can all share information about (and apply pressure on) the big companies that are not opposing SOPA with a blackout.
[deleted]
Where is PG in all of this?
This is retarded. You go dark to make users who would otherwise not know about SOPA realize how bad an idea it is.
No one using hackernews fits that description.
I am in favor of a wikipedia or perhaps even a google blackout. HN needs a blackout about as much as an anti-SOPA blog.
No one using hackernews fits that description.
I am in favor of a wikipedia or perhaps even a google blackout. HN needs a blackout about as much as an anti-SOPA blog.
HN stories get copied everywhere, with HN dark, how will the other tech blogs know which sites are going dark?
Maybe HN can just invert the colors on the site.
Maybe HN can just invert the colors on the site.
If HN went dark, it would be an example of preaching to the choir. same goes for redit goin' dark.
NO, only those sites that would be missed or noticed by those "special" people in Congress. HN is an excellent source of info for us the Net-savvy folk. No one in Congress would notice if HN went dark... Would be like shooting ourselves in the foot!
This seems totally ridiculous to me. Does anyone who comes to HN support SOPA? The advantage of companies like Facebook, Google and Amazon going black is that lots of people who have never heard of SOPA could be educated and asked to pressure congress.
What's the possible effect of HN going black?
What's the possible effect of HN going black?
I think we all need to step up to this ridiculous legislation (that's likely to get passed, $_ help us), however:
- If everyone on a site is aware of SOPA (and who isn't?), disappearing completely for the day doesn't help anything, really. And actually can be a bad thing; while I was able to watch the first hearing on CSPAN, I wasn't able to watch the other--the play-by-play on HN was really, really helpful.
- If no one who uses the site is aware of SOPA, going away will raise awareness and will be AWESOME.
- If your site is mission-critical, disappearing completely for the day is serious badness and could open you up to all sorts of mayhem.
By that logic, however, and I believe my logic is pretty sound, Google Search should display a doodle that jumps straight to opensecrets.org and Facebook should put up a big banner every third refresh telling everyone to wake the eff up. 0:)
- If everyone on a site is aware of SOPA (and who isn't?), disappearing completely for the day doesn't help anything, really. And actually can be a bad thing; while I was able to watch the first hearing on CSPAN, I wasn't able to watch the other--the play-by-play on HN was really, really helpful.
- If no one who uses the site is aware of SOPA, going away will raise awareness and will be AWESOME.
- If your site is mission-critical, disappearing completely for the day is serious badness and could open you up to all sorts of mayhem.
By that logic, however, and I believe my logic is pretty sound, Google Search should display a doodle that jumps straight to opensecrets.org and Facebook should put up a big banner every third refresh telling everyone to wake the eff up. 0:)
I have to agree with Kevin Brown here...
Yes, I think it should.
The answer is no, people who say yes are wrong.
You black out your website to raise awareness to the cause. I think it is a fair bet that an extremely high number of HN users know a lot about SOPA / PIPA. So there is no point doing this to educate regulars.
Perhaps news will spread. Sure, it will spread in the tech community. In the tech community knowledge of SOPA / PIPA is well known. Shock waves from HN being blacked out won't travel to the general public or politicians.
But what if it does travel to the public / politicians. "A website called Hacker News blacked out? Hackers are bad right? A bit like pirates which this bill is protecting us against? Shouldn't this site be blacked out anyway?"
HN has an unfortunate name. You black out a website to make a statement. With HN which is so obviously anti-SOPA/PIPA I don't see the point.
Now.. if gravatar blacked out all of the avatars for a day. Or Google + Bing + Yahoo turned off the switch for a couple of hours at the same time... that would be a statement.
You black out your website to raise awareness to the cause. I think it is a fair bet that an extremely high number of HN users know a lot about SOPA / PIPA. So there is no point doing this to educate regulars.
Perhaps news will spread. Sure, it will spread in the tech community. In the tech community knowledge of SOPA / PIPA is well known. Shock waves from HN being blacked out won't travel to the general public or politicians.
But what if it does travel to the public / politicians. "A website called Hacker News blacked out? Hackers are bad right? A bit like pirates which this bill is protecting us against? Shouldn't this site be blacked out anyway?"
HN has an unfortunate name. You black out a website to make a statement. With HN which is so obviously anti-SOPA/PIPA I don't see the point.
Now.. if gravatar blacked out all of the avatars for a day. Or Google + Bing + Yahoo turned off the switch for a couple of hours at the same time... that would be a statement.
Aware, but passive. Which in sum means that all that awareness is completely worthless. No, really, it is. The fact that majority of Hacker News readers are against SOPA means absolutely nothing. NONE of you passively disagreeing with this legislation will do an iota of difference.
The question is always: what does it take to push people from awareness and complete inaction to at least some form of action?
Hacker News is, for the most part, an intellectual stimulus, a drug for your brain. Something interesting to feed it while you are waiting for your code to build or to fill that oddly shaped slot in your daily calendar where you can't find any use for.
If we can make use of the uneasy feeling you get when your stimulus is unavailable and direct that towards what you could actually do to make your opinion observable, that would be a very good thing.
Here's how a website like Hacker News should be blacked out:
pick the busyest day at the beginning of the week (mon/wed) and black out 30 hours. from 0600 in the morning to 1200 lunch-time the next day.
on the site display information on how people can take action in ways that are observable. How to find their representatives, how to write to them in ways that are constructive.
There should also be some resources available to identify the backers of this legislation. It IS okay to not give companies that want to limit your freedom your money. It isn't "overly political" -- it is the most civilized and honest thing you can do. So do it to the degree you are capable and tell others.
Make or find materials that can easily be spread on social networks, because this is important: I assume that a lot of people reading hacker news are members of a self-selecting set of people who are smart and care. Your friends will look to you for advice. You are likely to have an above average degree of influence in your social network.
You guys are important and influential. If you don't do anything, everyone around you is going to take their cue from you and do nothing.
So I respectfully disagree that blacking out Hacker News is pointless. I think it is important exactly because inaction from us speaks much, much louder than inaction from the gray masses.
The question is always: what does it take to push people from awareness and complete inaction to at least some form of action?
Hacker News is, for the most part, an intellectual stimulus, a drug for your brain. Something interesting to feed it while you are waiting for your code to build or to fill that oddly shaped slot in your daily calendar where you can't find any use for.
If we can make use of the uneasy feeling you get when your stimulus is unavailable and direct that towards what you could actually do to make your opinion observable, that would be a very good thing.
Here's how a website like Hacker News should be blacked out:
pick the busyest day at the beginning of the week (mon/wed) and black out 30 hours. from 0600 in the morning to 1200 lunch-time the next day.
on the site display information on how people can take action in ways that are observable. How to find their representatives, how to write to them in ways that are constructive.
There should also be some resources available to identify the backers of this legislation. It IS okay to not give companies that want to limit your freedom your money. It isn't "overly political" -- it is the most civilized and honest thing you can do. So do it to the degree you are capable and tell others.
Make or find materials that can easily be spread on social networks, because this is important: I assume that a lot of people reading hacker news are members of a self-selecting set of people who are smart and care. Your friends will look to you for advice. You are likely to have an above average degree of influence in your social network.
You guys are important and influential. If you don't do anything, everyone around you is going to take their cue from you and do nothing.
So I respectfully disagree that blacking out Hacker News is pointless. I think it is important exactly because inaction from us speaks much, much louder than inaction from the gray masses.
Of course, applying pressure to your representatives is just one way. If you have access to influential people, you should educate these and then see if you can convince them to use their influence to visibly oppose this legislation.
Another vector is the press. SOPA is a non-issue in the press. It needs to get higher up on the agenda.
I regularly watch a few american newscasts and so far these issues have been absent. The anchors will gladly spend hours talking about silly, pointless bickering in congress, but will spend absolutely no time educating people on the issue that the prerequisites for a democracy are being eroded and being eroded rather quickly.
As a side note: The Economist publishes a yearly "Democracy Index". Last year the title was "Democracy in retreat". This year it is "Democracy under stress". Things are not looking good for western democracies.
Another vector is the press. SOPA is a non-issue in the press. It needs to get higher up on the agenda.
I regularly watch a few american newscasts and so far these issues have been absent. The anchors will gladly spend hours talking about silly, pointless bickering in congress, but will spend absolutely no time educating people on the issue that the prerequisites for a democracy are being eroded and being eroded rather quickly.
As a side note: The Economist publishes a yearly "Democracy Index". Last year the title was "Democracy in retreat". This year it is "Democracy under stress". Things are not looking good for western democracies.
This rang very true with me. I'm willing to wager only a tiny percentage of HN users have communicated their opposition to SOPA/PIPA to their representatives. Something like providing links to appropriate resources would convert time usually spent browsing HN into time actually helping stop SOPA/PIPA.
Easy ways to take some actions:
https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/hr3261 click on 'Oppose'
https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/s968 click on 'Oppose'
Slightly harder:
http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/pipa_sopa (Sends modifiable form email to your Senator and Representative).
Add a comments to the PopVOX entries
Go viral and tweet/facebook/G+ the DemandProgress page.
Harder still:
- Lookup your Senator and Representative's phone number and make a personal call. This gets the most traction as a constituent.
- If you are lazy, sign up on Demand Progress. Eventually you will get an email encouraging you to make a personal call. The software will provide you with the number to call and who you are calling based on your zip code. You don't even have to use Google.
Having HN black out is a dumb move. Most techies are aware of SOPA/PROTECT-IP. Many non-techies do not. Explaining just a little bit to my non-techie friends gets them opposing these bills. When we black out HN, at most we're simply shutting down a source of addiction. Even if it reaches the ears of the legislators, at best it will be seen as children saying, "I /QUIT, and I'm taking my ball with me." A bunch of techies shut down their own community site in protest. Wow ... Failure to understand Rhetorics 101.
Having FB and Google black out on the other hand reaches out to people who are not aware of these issues.
Best if you can convince non-techies to oppose these bills and then to have them call up their Congressmen. Tell them that bills do not, in fact, save jobs and would make life difficult for non-techies still treading water financially.
https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/hr3261 click on 'Oppose'
https://www.popvox.com/bills/us/112/s968 click on 'Oppose'
Slightly harder:
http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/pipa_sopa (Sends modifiable form email to your Senator and Representative).
Add a comments to the PopVOX entries
Go viral and tweet/facebook/G+ the DemandProgress page.
Harder still:
- Lookup your Senator and Representative's phone number and make a personal call. This gets the most traction as a constituent.
- If you are lazy, sign up on Demand Progress. Eventually you will get an email encouraging you to make a personal call. The software will provide you with the number to call and who you are calling based on your zip code. You don't even have to use Google.
Having HN black out is a dumb move. Most techies are aware of SOPA/PROTECT-IP. Many non-techies do not. Explaining just a little bit to my non-techie friends gets them opposing these bills. When we black out HN, at most we're simply shutting down a source of addiction. Even if it reaches the ears of the legislators, at best it will be seen as children saying, "I /QUIT, and I'm taking my ball with me." A bunch of techies shut down their own community site in protest. Wow ... Failure to understand Rhetorics 101.
Having FB and Google black out on the other hand reaches out to people who are not aware of these issues.
Best if you can convince non-techies to oppose these bills and then to have them call up their Congressmen. Tell them that bills do not, in fact, save jobs and would make life difficult for non-techies still treading water financially.
You can always add a POPVOX widget to the site, so people can send a message to Congress directly from HN.
http://popvoxnation.tumblr.com/post/15753030372/protesting-s...
http://popvoxnation.tumblr.com/post/15753030372/protesting-s...
And this fun one: http://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/oe3mf/these_61_sen...
Calling out for Redditors to distributively discuss PIPA with senators.
Calling out for Redditors to distributively discuss PIPA with senators.
If there's a day chosen on which anti-SOPA sites are urged to black out (which there is), I feel like HN would be obligated to comply based on the sentiments of the community toward the bill.
And so what if HNers know about SOPA? It's the action that counts. A page with information on how to contact your representative would be more effective here than on most sites, given all the relatively active, well-spoken, and well-informed SOPA opponents on HN.
If you do say no to a blackout, please offer a better alternative. It'd be depressing if the bill passed and we didn't do our best to stop it.
And so what if HNers know about SOPA? It's the action that counts. A page with information on how to contact your representative would be more effective here than on most sites, given all the relatively active, well-spoken, and well-informed SOPA opponents on HN.
If you do say no to a blackout, please offer a better alternative. It'd be depressing if the bill passed and we didn't do our best to stop it.
I strongly disagree with this.
The point of the protest is not only to let your regulars know (as you pointed out, they already know) but to let the world knows.
How?
When all the tech sites go dark, one can say: look, the entire tech community is strongly opposed to this thing, just look at these sites <insert list of links to high profile technology websites>.
The point of the protest is not only to let your regulars know (as you pointed out, they already know) but to let the world knows.
How?
When all the tech sites go dark, one can say: look, the entire tech community is strongly opposed to this thing, just look at these sites <insert list of links to high profile technology websites>.
The world doesn't give a toss or have an iota of awareness about HN.
Blacking out HN would be like switching off your computer in the privacy of your own home. Nobody knows or cares. All that would achieve is to remove an important vector for communication and information spread in the tech community.
Blacking out HN would be like switching off your computer in the privacy of your own home. Nobody knows or cares. All that would achieve is to remove an important vector for communication and information spread in the tech community.
I'm English and would be annoyed if a site I used vanished for a reason that is nothing to do with me. You don't like what your govt is doing, vote it out.
It does have everything to do with you. If SOPA passes it will be a massive threat to sites that are used by everyone - where you live is irrelevant when sites you use start shutting down their user uploaded content or add draconian moderation measures out of fear of the possible consequences of being cut off by their payment providers or losing their US traffic, or when they close as a consequence of losing revenue from the US.
I'm English too but totally support US sites blacking out in opposition to SOPA. It will affect the entire internet if the bill passes and may be used as a template for other countries (Note: I don't think HN blacking out will have much impact so I don't support this particular question)
I'm English, this has everything to do with us. Clearly HN should go dark, for people from non-U.S IPs it should redirect to a site explaing the international implications.
It is beside the point where you are based. The US are pushing this because they know that other countries will follow. So if they can't shut down a site because its out of their jurisdiction, in the long run they wont have too.
The UK have been trying to pass a load of crazy crap like this. If the US pass it then we will follow.
This is why everyone should be protesting against regardless of your geographical location, unless you want a web in which every country sees different.
The UK have been trying to pass a load of crazy crap like this. If the US pass it then we will follow.
This is why everyone should be protesting against regardless of your geographical location, unless you want a web in which every country sees different.
We did have a government that believed in censorship, surveillance, ID papers, biometric databases and so on. Guess what, we voted them out, and the first thing the new government did was scrap all that.
Is this guy serious? Ok, let's taylor the entire Internet to him. I would hate it if he became "annoyed". Oh and BTW, it's clearly an easy solution... let's just "vote it out".
That's been working great lately.
I agree that it would be "preaching to the choir" and with the name thing, but blacking out HN for a day might also convince HN readers to finally get around to writing their Congresspeople like they've been meaning to (but just haven't gotten around to).
>Shock waves from HN being blacked out won't travel to the general public or politicians.
I disagree. If certain big sites (google, facebook) black out then it WILL be covered by the mainstream media. As a result they're bound to publish "lists" of all other sites that have followed suit.
Every single site on these lists, whether Joe Public knows them or not, strengthens our cause.
I disagree. If certain big sites (google, facebook) black out then it WILL be covered by the mainstream media. As a result they're bound to publish "lists" of all other sites that have followed suit.
Every single site on these lists, whether Joe Public knows them or not, strengthens our cause.
Google + Bing + Yahoo turned off the switch for a couple of hours at the same time... that would be a statement.
I think that would only annoy people. They should make everything above the fold go dark, and make people scroll down to get their regular content.
I think that would only annoy people. They should make everything above the fold go dark, and make people scroll down to get their regular content.
Really? Doesn't every form of protest annoy someone or another?
At least, they'd try to find why google/facebook was unavailable for a day and run into the draconian SOPA - something they thought wasn't their business at all.
Which headline you'd rather see in NYT tomorrow:
> A leading enterpreneur community website goes black to protest SOPA.
``Our jobs would be endangered'', says PG.
> While discussions rage on the merits of SOPA,
a leading enterpreneur community remains calm.
``We aren't concerned enough to protest'', says PG.Which I'd rather see is irrelevant; neither has a chance to actually appear in mainstream media, especially the second non-news hypothetical story.
Yes, Even I agree with you. IT is a no . Almost all of us know about SOPA/PIPA . Blocking HN will only hinder us in getting the news , many submit interesting articles that take a stance on SOPA that only help us. Instead start telling your friends and colleagues who are not tech savvy , how this will affect their lives. Thats what I have been doing .
Announcing a hacker news blackout could sway the big guys to do the same.
HN has nothing to lose by blacking out.
Google have advertisers and business to worry about. They also have the G+ vs Facebook battle to be concerned about.
If Google blackout and no one else does then what will people do during the hours Google is down? They would go else where... shareholders and investors would be very unhappy. Especially if you consider these people who pop to Bing may decide they like Bing better.
If Facebook / Google / Yahoo / Bing all went offline from 6-9pm in a rolling blackout across the states on one night. (i.e. blackout by IP based on states timezone.) It would have a massive effect.
Hell, they don't even need to completely blackout. Just randomly black out elements of the page.
American's are still afraid of communism right? Lets add a bar at the top of the sites.
"SOPA would mean that we would have to black out portions of the Internet. Do you know who else does this? CHINA. Are you a communist? Campaign against SOPA here."
It's a bit direct but I thought this was how US politics worked?
Google have advertisers and business to worry about. They also have the G+ vs Facebook battle to be concerned about.
If Google blackout and no one else does then what will people do during the hours Google is down? They would go else where... shareholders and investors would be very unhappy. Especially if you consider these people who pop to Bing may decide they like Bing better.
If Facebook / Google / Yahoo / Bing all went offline from 6-9pm in a rolling blackout across the states on one night. (i.e. blackout by IP based on states timezone.) It would have a massive effect.
Hell, they don't even need to completely blackout. Just randomly black out elements of the page.
American's are still afraid of communism right? Lets add a bar at the top of the sites.
"SOPA would mean that we would have to black out portions of the Internet. Do you know who else does this? CHINA. Are you a communist? Campaign against SOPA here."
It's a bit direct but I thought this was how US politics worked?
I like your idea of adding "SOPA would mean that we would have to black out portions of the Internet..." That would get attention.
As far as Google's advertisers, the G+ vs FB battle, and investors. It's either take a temporary stand now or get forced into taking a long term stand down later. What good is google ads if they can't run your ad? What good is a G+ vs FB battle if its really GOV vs G+ & FB? What good will it be to investors once their stock drops because google's ad rev (as well as other revenue sources) drops?
As far as Google's advertisers, the G+ vs FB battle, and investors. It's either take a temporary stand now or get forced into taking a long term stand down later. What good is google ads if they can't run your ad? What good is a G+ vs FB battle if its really GOV vs G+ & FB? What good will it be to investors once their stock drops because google's ad rev (as well as other revenue sources) drops?
I was going to agree with VonLipwig until I read this. This may hold some truth to it - even if the world doesn't know HN (thankfully, I keep it on the DL myself) and even if all of HN's readers/contributors are fully aware of SOPA, showing solidarity may have some impact.
On the other hand, I think the GoDaddy exodus did more in a week than months full of discussions; 'big guy' corporations seem to really notice when we use our wallets to speak.
Based on that example, whom does HN control with its wallet?
Off the top of my head I think we could sway: AWS, Linode, Rackspace, Heroku and the likes -- are any of those supporters to begin with?
On the other hand, I think the GoDaddy exodus did more in a week than months full of discussions; 'big guy' corporations seem to really notice when we use our wallets to speak.
Based on that example, whom does HN control with its wallet?
Off the top of my head I think we could sway: AWS, Linode, Rackspace, Heroku and the likes -- are any of those supporters to begin with?
There is an excellent point to be made with going dark. If "we" go dark via css, (of course) the regular users will know how to get around it and the site will actually be up and running but not look like it is to outside observers. That sends the message: What looks like one thing (SOPA controls) won't actually stop the people who know what they are doing. That's not horrible in itself, but when you give up something so dear as due process to get it, it makes no sense.
If you support others doing it (google,bing yahoo) there is no reason not to do it yourself.
You can not control google or bing shutting down against Sopa, but you can at least control your own website and try to be supportive on HN doing so too.
You can not control google or bing shutting down against Sopa, but you can at least control your own website and try to be supportive on HN doing so too.
I initially agreed with you. Pragmatically, as everyone said, HN already is aware of SOPA, shutting it down will be useless. However, at an ideological level (we want internet freedom), the tech community must manifest its protest in a form of coordinated show of disapproval, we cannot be silently and passively opposed to something, and expect the bill not to pass. The OWS movement would be the obvious example of such coordinated "show".
It's not to educate, it's to motivate. If HN is down, that's a way of saying "You should be calling your senator right now" if you're an American. For others it's just a reminder of how serious this issue is.
Any site with user contributed content could be kicked off the internet, and HN is one of those.
Any site with user contributed content could be kicked off the internet, and HN is one of those.
ahh it's the "a single vote doesn't really count" argument
The best way to keep everyone at home and thinking there is nothing I can do to change anything.
I wouldn't be surprised if governments around the world are using sock-puppet accounts on a variety of sites to spread exactly this sentiment and to keep the masses quiet. (For the ones about to call me crazy, read this before you do: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-oper...)
I wouldn't be surprised if governments around the world are using sock-puppet accounts on a variety of sites to spread exactly this sentiment and to keep the masses quiet. (For the ones about to call me crazy, read this before you do: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-oper...)
I agree.. HN users are aware of the danger of SOPA. Furthermore- while HN is cool and all its a complete nobody compared to the big services that each average joe knows. Yet exactly those are the ones where blacking out would make any sense at all.
Agreed.
If Hacker News gets up on the pulpit on Sunday morning and turns its back on the mainstream to give an impassioned message to the readership who is already there to sing on its behalf...
...well, you get it.
If Hacker News gets up on the pulpit on Sunday morning and turns its back on the mainstream to give an impassioned message to the readership who is already there to sing on its behalf...
...well, you get it.
I think yes - not because it will matter to the users of HN, of which I imagine 99% are against SOPA, but because it will generate media interest and stories.
how about people who voted "yes" blackout any websites they own, along with HN?
No, because then I'm going to have to read Gizmodo.
Going dark is only effective if:
1) the fact that you are going dark is going to make a difference to a great number of people and prompt enough of them to act on it
2) your audience is not aware on the issue and needs to be and you have not found a better way to do it.
For HN, I believe that it won't make a huge difference to anyone if HN shuts down for one day, and as many people pointed out before, many HNers are well aware of the SOPA and going dark will not bring much further awareness.
For Google or Facebook, both 1 and 2 would prove worth acting on it. Reddit, maybe since they have a huge following & traffic. HN, clearly no point.
Rather than going dark, HNers would/should participate to the reddit initiative by voting up more SOPA related posts on the day Reddit goes dark, since HN is a contents hub. That would be way more productive.
For HN, I believe that it won't make a huge difference to anyone if HN shuts down for one day, and as many people pointed out before, many HNers are well aware of the SOPA and going dark will not bring much further awareness.
For Google or Facebook, both 1 and 2 would prove worth acting on it. Reddit, maybe since they have a huge following & traffic. HN, clearly no point.
Rather than going dark, HNers would/should participate to the reddit initiative by voting up more SOPA related posts on the day Reddit goes dark, since HN is a contents hub. That would be way more productive.
NO! The crowd here seems more informed than the general public. Nice thought, a bit unnecessary.
Blacking out a relatively unknown website as HN is not going to work.
But what about not using the internet on SOPA day? That would make a statement. If all tech companies just stopped using the internet for one day, people might get a little idea of what the internet means to us and how our work with internet is related to our customers.
But what about not using the internet on SOPA day? That would make a statement. If all tech companies just stopped using the internet for one day, people might get a little idea of what the internet means to us and how our work with internet is related to our customers.
Yes, but only to encourage a pile-on effect leading to Facebook and Google doing it.
Yes, in solidarity, but with the understanding that it will have no other purpose. Everyone who comes on HN knows about SOPA.
No doubt.
No, anyone that reads HN knows the issues, it's the mass population that needs to be made aware.
No.
Sorry, but while I like this site your not going to do anything but annoy those of us who agree with the stance.
Simply put, the public in general does not know about HN and the public does not care. This site has little to no impact in that arena.
Now if you want to annoy those of us who agree with the idea of sites noticeable to the public going dark then you will have accomplished that.
Sorry, but while I like this site your not going to do anything but annoy those of us who agree with the stance.
Simply put, the public in general does not know about HN and the public does not care. This site has little to no impact in that arena.
Now if you want to annoy those of us who agree with the idea of sites noticeable to the public going dark then you will have accomplished that.
I voted yes, here's why....
There is the "awareness argument" to be made, there'salso a protest element. Going dark is a protest against SOPA, and I fully support that protest.
But most of all I voted yes because....
What if FB or Google went dark, but all the Tech Sites stayed up? What would that look like? It'd look like we're a bunch of selfish cunts, that's what.
There is the "awareness argument" to be made, there'salso a protest element. Going dark is a protest against SOPA, and I fully support that protest.
But most of all I voted yes because....
What if FB or Google went dark, but all the Tech Sites stayed up? What would that look like? It'd look like we're a bunch of selfish cunts, that's what.
By blackout I suggest that the site changes it's look (goes Black for the day) and only shows SOPA/PIPA related articles and resources.
Maybe for the day, the submit form asks something similar to: 'Is this article SOPA/PIPA related, if not it will show tomorrow'.
Maybe for the day, the submit form asks something similar to: 'Is this article SOPA/PIPA related, if not it will show tomorrow'.
In the description, you wrote "in support SOPA", instead "in protest to".
I just hope the reddit etc. blackouts are only going to be in the country, the US, that SOPA will be in. Not only from a personal perspective, since I am not in the US, but also for the US. We don't want to create the perception that US sites are unreliable because they can go down because of political activism over internal US issues. Companies are already going to some effort towards hedging their income from being dependent on single providers, e.g. Google traffic or Amazon sales.
Yes, HN should go dark AND should show a prominent message with suggestions about what the visitor can do to protest the law
Most of the comments here seem to indicate that HN should not black out, but the votes say otherwise.
I voted yes. I believe that any gesture, show of solidarity or whatever you want to call it can help.
I voted yes. I believe that any gesture, show of solidarity or whatever you want to call it can help.
go dark for a day, or go dark forever
Regardless of whether or not HN readers are already aware of SOPA I think it's important the community show solidarity with other sites going dark in protest. A widespread blackout should get some attention, the wider the better.
In general, HN should not go dark...it should dim.
The appropriate action would be to block access from U.S. IP addresses and to block links to articles with the same.
There is no reason to make the rest of the world put up with more of the results of US political posturing than they currently do.
It's our (America's) problem. We're the one's who should feel the pain.
The appropriate action would be to block access from U.S. IP addresses and to block links to articles with the same.
There is no reason to make the rest of the world put up with more of the results of US political posturing than they currently do.
It's our (America's) problem. We're the one's who should feel the pain.
Should the anti-SOPA website go dark in protest of SOPA?
No, while I think other websites with users who are less aware would benefit the cause by having a Stop SOPA message, explanation of the reason behind the blackout, and the blackout for a day, most of the HN community is already aware of the issue.
I thinking HN blacking out is a bad strategy. If Google did that, then its different, because it is responsible for huge amount of web-traffic and there would be uproar among many businesses.
Fairly speaking, HN is not such a big player (like Google), silencing itself may be counter productive in that, people might not care and whatever attention it was bringing might be lost for that time frame!
The answer is to go Gray not dark. Keep the site up but forward everyone to a page with SOPA facts and contact info for politicians, petitions, etc.
no
Doesn't make any sense to blackout HN. A large majority of HN visitors are already aware of SOPA - no need to raise awareness with this audience.
No, this is for awareness. Everyone here is aware.
It's a nice thought, but considering the several SOPA-related posts on the front page every day, I really doubt HN needs to go dark to inform its users.
Maybe first take a poll titled "Do you know what SOPA is?"
Maybe first take a poll titled "Do you know what SOPA is?"
While I think it should go down, if it doesn't it'll be interesting to see the results of the massive influx of anxiety-driven redditors looking for a place with karma-whoring link-baity headlines to fill with memes.
If I'm right with this it can become the ultimate stress test for the HN community guidelines and it's moderation system.
If I'm right with this it can become the ultimate stress test for the HN community guidelines and it's moderation system.
Regardless of whether or not this would be "preaching to the choir", it will still make news, and a bunch of high profile websites all going dark at the same time is much more impressive than just reddit.
Yes. Lead by example.
Yes. Stand with all of us and go dark. If HN doesn't make such a gesture, how can we call ourselves true to our convictions?
Instead of going dark Google should go to a page explaining SOPA then after a period of time redirect to what the user was searching for. That way there won't be huge implications for the economy, and the user is forced to confront what SOPA means.
We should learn from the godaddy/SOPA situation... we have the money, we own the internet, we pay for domains, hosting, servers, services. 1 day without WE using/paying the web will do more damage than 1 day with "go dark" websites.
I can live 1 day without internet... can you?
I can live 1 day without internet... can you?
I am thinking of installing fedora on my laptop as a sign of protest.
No, because going dark purpose is to spread awareness and everyone here already knows / understands.
There's a difference between awareness and action. We need to take action. Going dark would help those who've not written/called/met with their representatives to do so, before it's too late.
Readers of HN generally already oppose SOPA. To do so would be to take out our hub for news and info on the topic. You would accomplish nothing other than having us look elsewhere. Bad call.
There is no way that anybody who browses this site hasn't heard about SOPA.
if you block out hn, where would i get my news about sopa?!
It's for a good cause so if anyone isn't willing to sacrifice something so small to help prevent something that will force you to sacrifice something much bigger – then you sir, have lost your mind.
The vast majority of HN users are aware of SOPA/PIPA so it wouldn't have almost any impact. There's no need for HN to go dark. Sites where most of the people are not aware of SOPA/PIPA, like wikipedia, facebook, twitter, google, youtube, maybe 9gag... should go dark, at least for some hours.