zlacker

>>cbtacy+(OP)
Eventually the cloud is going to burst and everyone’s data will be public. The motive will be similar to this one, where a huge blast radius of collateral damage is accepted in the name of harming bad people. Seeing people eagerly download this data that surely includes countless amounts of personal info of non-Nazis shows this clearly.

>>gfodor+xm
Fortunately, given the purported scope of the hack, it seems we'll be able to actually quantify that. How many of the websites weren't hosting violent or extremist content? If this is real, we should be able to get an exact percentage.

>>heyits+xp
I would assume given any hosting provider, that most content would not be deemed "violent" or "extremist". But of course, it depends on your interpretation.

For example, some people consider radical servers from the anarchist scene to be hosting violent/extremist material, while i personally consider governments and big corporations to be pretty violent and extremist themselves in how they ruthlessly dominate the world.

Actions and speech are not neutral. It's all a matter of (political) perspective.

>>southe+xZ
Epik is not just “any” hosting provider. In fact, there’s no reason to use them unless you fall into the “unhostable” category elsewhere.

Their infra, peering and prices are way worse than pretty much everyone else.

>>qetern+U71
> In fact, there’s no reason to use them unless you fall into the “unhostable” category elsewhere.

False. Even if your present day content is not currently censorable but you expect it will be censorable one day as cultural norms shift or speech authoritarians gain power, it is wise to put it somewhere that is censorship resistant, Epik or otherwise.