you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

Considering how many people will be arguing each way on every topic, I doubt anyone will get involved. They probably would, however, if the site gets big and completely overrun with Pyramid-ignoring racists (which fortunately isn't the case at the moment).

[–]Marou 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (13 children)

The problem with "Anti-Racism" and "Hate speech" laws is that you can make an argument that is situated right at the top of the debate pyramid (and back it with reams of evidence) that is still illegal - because under such laws it is not the truth of a statement being evaluated, it is intent and how the statement makes people feel.

[–][deleted]  (12 children)


    [–]magnora7[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

    Switzerland doesn't have dragnet spying operations. Switzerland can't shut down saidit without first going to a judge and getting approval.

    In the US, they can just decide we're done and pull the plug one day. In Switzerland, they cannot do that without a long process that would give us plenty of time to set up a new server.

    This is an extra layer of security.

    And if you believe the laws in the US about internet free speech are actually being honored to their true intent in 2019 in US courtrooms, I have a bridge to sell you.

    Overall I have little doubt this provides saidit more layers of security and failsafes. US law isn't bad, but Swiss law is better. Especially when it comes to avoiding having your server shut down by external organizations.

    [–][deleted]  (7 children)


      [–]magnora7[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      even in Switzerland.

      Thankfully you're wrong on that. The racial discrimination law they do have matches up with the pyramid of debate fairly well. I actually think it'll work out well.

      If they seize the server, we can just set up in other country. If they seize it in the US, I might go to jail and be unable to do that at all. This is another layer of security.

      I think Switzerland is much safer, and they fact they don't fuck around protects us from big organizations more than it hurts us. But I appreciate the concerns and the points you raise, and I'm all ears if you've got more points.

      [–][deleted]  (2 children)


        [–]magnora7[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        Thanks for the info. We have considered a VPN, but it's not compatible with our DDOS protection. We'll be sure to keep an eye out for the problems you mentioned.

        [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        IMHO I think you should try to reach out to Tin Foil Hat, Higherside Chats, James Corbett, Ryan Dawson, Ryan Cristian, Adam Green, HighImpactFlix, Holly Seeliger, and countless others (expand my outdated Fascinating Viewpoints list) and do a SaidIt promotional tour talking about the pros and cons of setting up your own site, and the trials and tribulations of being free speech, while keeping it classy. Not just talking about wanting alternative but actually making it happen. That's a story NO ONE is talking about, much less any with any experience. Talk about the Rothchilds another time. This conspiracy to silence is real and in our faces.

        It may gain us unwanted attention, but it also might gain us great assistance and open new options, and should they ever try to take us down at least more people will already know about us and might rally around when necessary. They're less likely to do so if they never even heard of us before.

        Also, it might be worth trying to coordinate a loose apolitical affiliation network of friends and associates for free speech.

        [–]Timmy 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

        A question. What if they do not deny the Holocaust existed, but claim, based on recorded International Red Cross documents, that the number of people that died in German WWII prison camps was much lower than six million? Do you think that would be considered illegal? The fact is not in dispute, just a supporting claim.

        [–]sodasplash 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        Maybe the press could help by reporting the details of the case.

        [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

        In the same way WikiSpooks provides a site backup maybe SaidIt can do the same as a baby step towards decentralization.

        [–]JasonCarswell 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

        I concur. Another aspect to privacy is anonymity, which obviously is not a concern of mine.