Heartiste deplatformed?

worldwidetraveler

Hummingbird
Gold Member
debeguiled said:
Simeon_Strangelight said:
Obviously he should have remained oblivious to the tribe doing crimes at rates of 10000 to 100.000% more than Whites and Asians. He should have just stuck his head in the sand, sang DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH loudly and mumble something about those evil Whites - like all the good NPCs are trained to do.

He was the same guy, but his priorities shifted. Still he pumped out good Game content and frankly I doubt that he would treat a highly intelligent black Red Pill guy unfairly. But he knows what's up and how the averages look like.

Sure - some people would not like it and many would get angry, because the eternal boogieman of racism/mythical White Supremacy suddenly cannot explain
things - but you can always get angry and reject it in entirety without taking even a glance at it.

Yeah, that's what I said.

Look at what you did. You got Simeon all riled up again. Bad debeguiled.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
HermeticAlly said:
I hope that Antifa flyer is a false flag, and I hope those get spread all over the place. Agreeing and amplifying the enemy's message will make NPCs realize how absurd it is.

On second thought, it's just as likely to be a real poster from their slightly more fanatical elements that the antifa PR is denying as a false flag...
 

debeguiled

Peacock
Gold Member
worldwidetraveler said:
debeguiled said:
Simeon_Strangelight said:
Obviously he should have remained oblivious to the tribe doing crimes at rates of 10000 to 100.000% more than Whites and Asians. He should have just stuck his head in the sand, sang DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH loudly and mumble something about those evil Whites - like all the good NPCs are trained to do.

He was the same guy, but his priorities shifted. Still he pumped out good Game content and frankly I doubt that he would treat a highly intelligent black Red Pill guy unfairly. But he knows what's up and how the averages look like.

Sure - some people would not like it and many would get angry, because the eternal boogieman of racism/mythical White Supremacy suddenly cannot explain
things - but you can always get angry and reject it in entirety without taking even a glance at it.

Yeah, that's what I said.

Look at what you did. You got Simeon all riled up again. Bad debeguiled.

I don't think he knows I live in Oregon. This is like me lecturing him about orthomolecular medicine.
 
It's fine.

Being aware of things does not mean that you want to be read about it in a specific riled-up manner. And that is where Heartiste went.
It does not have to be for you even if you agree with him on principle.
 

Sword and Board

Kingfisher
If Heartiste was criticizing the Catholic church, China, Russia, Iran or Islam as the great worldly menace he would of been left alone. But he was criticizing something else wasn't he. Something that is oppressively not allowed to be criticized or noticed. No conspiracy here, no sir...
 

VNvet

Kingfisher
Andrew Anglin recently said he would give Heartiste a column on the Daily Stormer. CH was a fan of Anglin, so maybe he'll accept the offer.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
VNvet said:
Andrew Anglin recently said he would give Heartiste a column on the Daily Stormer. CH was a fan of Anglin, so maybe he'll accept the offer.

Are you sure about that? somehow I would have thought that someone as bright as CH would know that Anglin is a toxic figure and possibly a shill...
 

weambulance

Hummingbird
Gold Member
TheBoom said:
I miss CH. Astute and had a flair. Unfortunately how he has handled the deplatforming reflects poorly on him and the right in general. All this delusional talk of his (and most of the Dissident Right) about an upcoming civil war and he didn't even adequately back up his site or have a contingency plan when it was obvious that WordPress would soon deplatform him? Lol

I don't really think the lack of technical talent on the right is the problem, though the lack is real. The problem is most people are too lazy and cheap to stop relying on free shit and switch to a platform Big Tech can't readily attack.

Every time there's a high profile deplatforming half the people I know get all riled up and say how important it is to build their own platforms blah blah blah. But here we are, almost 2 years into the censorship push, and they're still on blogspot or wordpress.com, relying entirely on twitter and youtube for marketing, selling their shit exclusively on amazon*.

Getting the right addicted to free shit is one of the best plays the left ever made.


*To be clear, I approve of using the enemy's platforms to sap their resources and take advantage of their networks, but you should always have alternatives and be pushing people toward them.
 

VNvet

Kingfisher
weambulance said:
TheBoom said:
I miss CH. Astute and had a flair. Unfortunately how he has handled the deplatforming reflects poorly on him and the right in general. All this delusional talk of his (and most of the Dissident Right) about an upcoming civil war and he didn't even adequately back up his site or have a contingency plan when it was obvious that WordPress would soon deplatform him? Lol

I don't really think the lack of technical talent on the right is the problem, though the lack is real. The problem is most people are too lazy and cheap to stop relying on free shit and switch to a platform Big Tech can't readily attack.

And what's this magical alternative platform that Big Tech can't readily attack AND gives you exposure to a sizable audience?

crickets

Tor works as a good backup, but I'm skeptical that readers would donate money to cover costs of maintaining a server. Especially when these donors have to figure out Bitcoin or Monero.

Basically what would happen is that all these "lazy and cheap" content creators that donate their time would now have to donate money, and headache, to keep themselves online.
 

weambulance

Hummingbird
Gold Member
And what's this magical alternative platform that Big Tech can't readily attack AND gives you exposure to a sizable audience?

Your attitude is exactly the problem. "When's someone going to come along and build it for me and let me use it for free?" Did it ever occur to you that the services are free for a reason? That's the point! They're free because that keeps people on them, where they can be monitored, data-mined, speech-controlled, and silenced at will. "Free" also makes even very affordable services look expensive. I pay $5 a month for my email service and it's awesome, worth every penny. But $5 looks like shit next to a "free" account for most people.

You build a platform like this: "rent some servers, build a website, and tell people where it is". It's what people did from the start of the internet to approximately 2012, when social media took over and everyone forgot that's how the internet used to work.

What's harder for Big Tech to do?

1. Flip a single value in their own relational database that turns your account and everything associated with it off
2. Convince multiple companies they have no power over, potentially located in different countries, to deny you service all at once

Even if they pull off #2---which they won't bother with in all but the most extreme cases---as long as you keep backups and an email list you could be back online in anywhere from a couple days to literally no time at all, if you know how to design a failover system with live backups. They tried hard to knock Daily Stormer out. How'd that go, in the end? And did they manage to drive Alex Jones off the internet?

It's not expensive to run a blog that has serious traffic if you're smart in choosing your software. Hell, you can run a daily podcast without much money. Bandwidth and storage are cheap nowadays. Video is where things get expensive. If you can't afford to vlog six hours a day in 1080p60 on your own dime, maybe just don't do that.

Big Tech has power because everyone insists on staying on their services instead of actually building their own with open source software or writing their own tools. Doing so is worse than building your house on sand. It's akin to building your house on a bomb, handing your enemy the detonator, and just hoping they never decide to set it off.
 

Blaster

Ostrich
Gold Member
You build a platform like this: "rent some servers, build a website, and tell people where it is". It's what people did from the start of the internet to approximately 2012, when social media took over and everyone forgot that's how the internet used to work.

You lose your anonymity in the first step. You also left out "register a domain name" which is effectively the bare minimum necessary to "tell people where it is." That can be done by proxy but you need to trust the proxy. I could host Heartiste's blog, for example, but why should he trust me? And we'd probably need a financial arrangement anyway because I probably wouldn't be able to host it for free.

More importantly of course is that your suggestion to "tell people where it is" is hopelessly naive in the current world, in particular you are ignoring the importance of network effects. People recognized LONG before 2012 that social networks were a winner-take-all scenario, and at this point the means of "telling people where it is" are mostly all controlled by hostile entities. In Heartiste's case, obviously he already has a reputation that he built starting in I think 2007 or 2008.

At this point you can't just "build your own platform" and have any real chance of success. The best you can hope for with that goal is to have a "reject platform" full of everyone that got banned from the real one that everyone else uses. And you can post metrics about how it's technically less of an echo chamber or whatever but the bottom line is that your audience is limited. Trump uses Twitter, not Gab. All the MSM talking heads use twitter, not gab. All the famous celebrities use twitter (or instagram), not gab. Your family and friends use facebook. Virtually everyone knows about wikipedia, what it is, and what it can be used for. No one has ever heard of infogalactic and if they see it they'll just think it's some kind of wikipedia knock-off. I'd still love if it could be a reasonable competitor but so far it hasn't done so well. There are multiple options for publishing streaming video but unless it's on youtube no one is going to watch it. You can host your own github clone (eg with gitlab) for open source development but most potential contributors would prefer you to be on github. Then there's pinterest, another fuckhuge site that controls massive amounts of internet traffic.

These obstacles aren't necessarily insurmountable but it's absolutely naive to pretend as if all one must to do to get noticed in 2019 is to set up a site and tell some people about it.
 

McCarthy

Sparrow
Blaster said:
You build a platform like this: "rent some servers, build a website, and tell people where it is". It's what people did from the start of the internet to approximately 2012, when social media took over and everyone forgot that's how the internet used to work.

You lose your anonymity in the first step. You also left out "register a domain name" which is effectively the bare minimum necessary to "tell people where it is." That can be done by proxy but you need to trust the proxy. I could host Heartiste's blog, for example, but why should he trust me? And we'd probably need a financial arrangement anyway because I probably wouldn't be able to host it for free.

More importantly of course is that your suggestion to "tell people where it is" is hopelessly naive in the current world, in particular you are ignoring the importance of network effects. People recognized LONG before 2012 that social networks were a winner-take-all scenario, and at this point the means of "telling people where it is" are mostly all controlled by hostile entities. In Heartiste's case, obviously he already has a reputation that he built starting in I think 2007 or 2008.

At this point you can't just "build your own platform" and have any real chance of success. The best you can hope for with that goal is to have a "reject platform" full of everyone that got banned from the real one that everyone else uses. And you can post metrics about how it's technically less of an echo chamber or whatever but the bottom line is that your audience is limited. Trump uses Twitter, not Gab. All the MSM talking heads use twitter, not gab. All the famous celebrities use twitter (or instagram), not gab. Your family and friends use facebook. Virtually everyone knows about wikipedia, what it is, and what it can be used for. No one has ever heard of infogalactic and if they see it they'll just think it's some kind of wikipedia knock-off. I'd still love if it could be a reasonable competitor but so far it hasn't done so well. There are multiple options for publishing streaming video but unless it's on youtube no one is going to watch it. You can host your own github clone (eg with gitlab) for open source development but most potential contributors would prefer you to be on github. Then there's pinterest, another fuckhuge site that controls massive amounts of internet traffic.

These obstacles aren't necessarily insurmountable but it's absolutely naive to pretend as if all one must to do to get noticed in 2019 is to set up a site and tell some people about it.

China is smart. Shut down all the foreign stuff (just network effects in the end) and build your own. China stays Chinese.
And thanks God China exists. Perhaps it is our last hope, despite them being ethnocentric as hell.
 

weambulance

Hummingbird
Gold Member
I was not laying out a specific task list.

If you insist on maintaining perfect anonymity (not possible) you're never going to get anything done anyway. You don't get to be a dissident without taking any risks. And do you think Heartiste was pulling some super spy ops so proficiently that Automattic and half a dozen other big tech companies couldn't figure out who he is if they wanted to? Even tech dweebs can barely keep up with all the ways you can compromise yourself, and those are just the ways we know about. Some of them are simply unavoidable unless you never use a computer or have superhuman discipline.

Not been doxxed yet != not going to be doxxed when it's convenient. /pol/ users have had feds show up at their doors. We've had mainstream news companies identify random people for making memes. They want to find you, they'll find you.

All the muh network effect crap is extremely tiresome at this point. Talk about a self-fulfilling whine. Nobody moves to other platforms because nobody is moving to other platforms. Well, guess what? If people forget you existed the moment you leave/get banned from twitter/facebook/youtube/whatever, they didn't really give a damn what you had to say in the first place, and you never had any real influence. You were just borrowing your enemy's megaphone. If they do care, they'll follow you to your blog or forum or Gab or wherever. But they're going to need to know where to go before you get banned.

In any case, the point of building your own platform isn't to replace Twitter, it's to build a little place of your own that won't be shut down. A place for people to find you if you do get disappeared, or maybe build a little community based on common interests. Set up a store as a backup to Amazon. Whatever. Even if you mainly use youtube or whatever, it's trivially easy to automate cross posting on other platforms. None of this is difficult for anyone willing to actually learn something new. I've even laid out specific road maps for people to follow in the past, but all I ever get are excuses why Big Tech is omnipotent and it's pointless to even try.

[attachment=42012]
Pictured: most of the right; 2019, colorized

There are two choices here. 1) You can work to build a little place of your own, something you actually control, or 2) you can just not bother, rely entirely on enemy platforms, self-censor trying to avoid the ban hammer---and probably mind-screw yourself in the process because thought control is the whole point of speech control.

If you take option 1, maybe you only end up with a few hundred or thousand people reading your work, but those people? The ones who could be arsed to get off the passive drip feed of Twitter and Youtube? They're the ones who will actually do something with what you're saying besides hit like/retweet then forget it when the next shiny thing passes under their nose. Personally, I'd be ecstatic if I could convince a mere 3000 people to buy everything I write. I don't need to reach half the planet. I need to reach 3000 people.

If you take option 2, you lose. Just a matter of when and how. And for anyone thinking Big Daddy Government is going to step in and fix things, that's a cure that's far worse than the disease. Two words: regulatory capture. Think it's bad now? Wait until the big tech SJWs are the ones writing the actual laws.

Obviously it's not easy to build something of significance. It takes consistent hard work over years with no guarantee of success, and you're not going to just shitpost your way to prominence the way you can on social media. But at least you'll own it. What you build will be real, not an illusion of influence that can be snatched away at the whim of any nonbinary bluehair dragonkin employee with database write privileges.

Up to you.
 

Attachments

  • 336oyf.jpg
    336oyf.jpg
    65.7 KB · Views: 3,336

VNvet

Kingfisher
weambulance said:
And what's this magical alternative platform that Big Tech can't readily attack AND gives you exposure to a sizable audience?

Your attitude is exactly the problem. "When's someone going to come along and build it for me and let me use it for free?" Did it ever occur to you that the services are free for a reason? That's the point! They're free because that keeps people on them, where they can be monitored, data-mined, speech-controlled, and silenced at will. "Free" also makes even very affordable services look expensive. I pay $5 a month for my email service and it's awesome, worth every penny. But $5 looks like shit next to a "free" account for most people.


Nowhere in that quote did I mention price or wanting stuff for free. I'm not sure why you're attacking me on price.

weambulance said:
You build a platform like this: "rent some servers, build a website, and tell people where it is". It's what people did from the start of the internet to approximately 2012, when social media took over and everyone forgot that's how the internet used to work.

Go ahead and setup a Tor onion site and tell me how many visitors you get without using a mainstream service to push them there.

That's what it's coming to because literally everyone is getting banned from the normie-web before they can build an audience.

weambulance said:
What's harder for Big Tech to do?

1. Flip a single value in their own relational database that turns your account and everything associated with it off
2. Convince multiple companies they have no power over, potentially located in different countries, to deny you service all at once

Look at Daily Stormer. That's what's going to happen to everyone in a few years.

weambulance said:
Even if they pull off #2---which they won't bother with in all but the most extreme cases---as long as you keep backups and an email list you could be back online in anywhere from a couple days to literally no time at all, if you know how to design a failover system with live backups. They tried hard to knock Daily Stormer out. How'd that go, in the end? And did they manage to drive Alex Jones off the internet?

Let's see. Anglin had to jump around like 15 registrars in a bunch of different countries over a few months.

He was screwed until (((weev))), who had just been released from federal prison with a goofy American History X swastika tattoo, offered to set him up for free.

Anglin has said multiple times that (((weev))) saved the Daily Stormer.

weambulance said:
It's not expensive to run a blog that has serious traffic if you're smart in choosing your software. Hell, you can run a daily podcast without much money. Bandwidth and storage are cheap nowadays. Video is where things get expensive. If you can't afford to vlog six hours a day in 1080p60 on your own dime, maybe just don't do that.

You're underestimating the cost of serious traffic. Anglin, since you brought him up, was complaining just a few days ago about a lack of money. Roosh has also mentioned that this stuff isn't cheap.

Anglin got a few big donations after C-Ville, but has got practically no donations since. He claims to be running on only those big donations. You can see his Bitcoin wallet here. If you take out the random 6 figure donations, then he really hasn't got much. And that's for a guy that is pigeonholed into that job.

weambulance said:
Big Tech has power because everyone insists on staying on their services instead of actually building their own with open source software or writing their own tools. Doing so is worse than building your house on sand. It's akin to building your house on a bomb, handing your enemy the detonator, and just hoping they never decide to set it off.

The typical "build your own service" argument.

Assuming you build literally every upstream service, then you still end up with Big Tech sabotaging your website.

Look at all the Imgur clones that got flooded with CP and shutdown by the feds.
Look at what happened to Hatreon and Cody Wilson. Yeah, setup your own bank.
Look at what happened to Storm Front.
Look at what happened to (((Gab))) with their registrar forcing them to remove Daily Stormer links.
Look at what happened to Return of Kings.
Look at what happened to Dissenter.
Look at what happened to Huawei.
Look at what happened to Wikileaks.

The only service that Big Tech hasn't been hit is Telegram, but I'm sure that's coming.

At this point, Big Tech knows exactly what they're doing and where this leads. This tells me that it is all part of the plan.
 

Handsome Creepy Eel

Owl
Gold Member
weambulance said:
(people should build their own platforms)

Even in countries far from USA, it can be quite challenging to find a web hosting (or any other IT service) provider who doesn't directly or indirectly make use of either Amazon Web Services or Microsoft Azure. Good luck hosting your platform or connecting it to anything else on the Internet when those two decide that you shouldn't be allowed online.

While of course we should be avoiding free shit and Big Tech at all costs, it is an illusion to think that we can outrun their influence. Everyone ends up in the gulag eventually.
 

Days of Broken Arrows

Crow
Gold Member
So many people are getting deplatformed that we need to do a general thread on it.

I follow a cynical economics-related site called Zero Hedge, and even they've been suspended on Facebook and just said they were thrown off Pinterest. When they start coming for the economics geeks, you know there's real trouble ahead.

Whether you agree with Heartiste, Lauren Southern, Milo, or Paul Joseph Watson is now beside the point. The larger point, I think, is that ANYONE who doesn't bow before the corporate echo chamber altar is getting banned from some online space -- if not all at once.

I think I mentioned earlier in the thread that after FOSTA/SESTA, the online sex/brothel Web sites moved their online accounts to Holland and now use an NL suffix for their Web sites. This is probably going to be the future for all politically incorrect thinkers.

***

It goes without saying, but what's really really really really troubling about this is that the media is in lockstep with Big Tech and the corporate oligarchy over this issue. Back when I was a newspaper writer, any banning was cause for concern.

We didn't stop and say "It's their company -- they can do what they want, la de dah." We took the subject seriously and considered the precedent that any ban set -- whether it was a record store or record company banning music, a convenience store banning teens, or a library or bookstore removing books.

The culture has changed so drastically that people who make their living using words no longer see people who ban words as the enemy. Online dissidents now have to move their operations OUTSIDE the U.S. to say what they want without ramifications. Land of the free? More like land of corporate control.
 

Richard Turpin

Kingfisher
They know they can block and de-platform whoever they like with total impunity. Just a few nasty tweets to ignore, but no real trouble from the legal or media side (their comrades, after all). The plebs are silent 'cos they are afraid to speak up (real world repercussions if they do).

But anyone who's read a bit of history can tell you the good news here; that it's precisely at the peak of their strength, that empires, movements, trends are most vulnerable. The contempt felt by those 'silent plebs' will only grow and once they sense weakness they'll find their courage again.

Regarding Heartiste, I miss my daily check-ins on his blog. There's too many stupid things happening in the news that aren't getting that special CH treatment!
 

bucky

Ostrich
Richard Turpin said:
Regarding Heartiste, I miss my daily check-ins on his blog. There's too many stupid things happening in the news that aren't getting that special CH treatment!

Aye. There's still Vox Day for a decent roundup of all the news they don't want you to hear, but it's not the same. I wish Heartiste would come back. There's got to be a service in Russia or somewhere like that that would host him.
 
Black Pigeon Speaks with 500.000 subscribers was just deleted from Youtube - similar to Heartiste - no warnings, nothing, just total elimination without explanation.

My guess is that they are coming for the bigger thought leaders first and working their way down to the smaller fish. Sometimes it has little logical meaning and strategy as they do it. Sooner or later they will come for anyone and try to stifle all the message because the truth is that people trust the media less and less. And the less contrary information there is to refute their bullshit, then the more people will believe in the propaganda.
 
Top