Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by killyourcar 1386 days ago
You realize the fallacy here, right? Terminating commercial agreements with three origins of stochastic terrorism is not some ratchet towards new speak. It's just three cases where Cloudflare decided that sheltering terrorism wasn't in their best interest.
1 comments

>stochastic terrorism

stochastic terrorism is new speak itself, if redefining inaction to be action, is it redefining silence to be violence, it transitioning from a society focuses on first party liability (i.e am i only responsible for my own actions not the actions of others) to a collectivist mentality of not only am I responsible for my own actions but for the actions of everyone connected to me

It's not new speak. It's a more accurate set of words to describe what we used to call "lone wolves". Stochastic means random, statistically measurable but not predictable.

The term "stochastic terrorism" means terror attacks like school shootings, swattings, and driving trucks into protestors that happen with a certain statistical likelihood, but whose individual events cannot be predicted.

The phrase is the result of a slippery slope on the definition of "terrorism", which once referred to guerrilla groups driven by a religious or political ideology, to violent individuals lacking any ideology at all.

But the slippery slope I had in mind, however, was that once Cloudflare submits to the pressure of Keffals against this odious site, that precedent will be set, and then another pressure group will emerge targeting a slightly less odious site, etc.