|
On July 27 2009 14:03 Loser777 wrote: Scientology wasn't even directly threatening 4chan. Not only is this action provocative, it's completely against the ideology of 4chan.
How did that pan out anyways? I heard a few stunts against scientologists, then the FBI backing the scientologists. Did it end there?
|
I love ED they have a way of writing that sends chills down my back and make things sound really interesting.
|
Noooo not my 4chan! I think AT&T just fucked themselves... do they know what anon is capable of?
|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote: can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T?
On July 27 2009 14:04 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 13:56 Zzoram wrote:UPDATED 6: 4chan’s current gameplan evolving over at Encyclopedia Dramatica (Great stuff!). Also, from reports gathered on Reddit, it seems this block allegedly is because of massive DDoS-attacks against img.4chan.org. The reports doesn’t say anything about why AT&T would block 15.5% of all US internet users from using a specific website without any warning, though. Over-reacting to a normal ISP response of taking down sites that are hit with massive DDoS-attacks until they are stopped? Sounds like 4chan to me. I don't think you know what you are talking about. TO EVERYONE SAYING THEY TOOK IT DOWN BECAUSE OF DDOS ATTACKScould u pls explain the rational behind this? how do the ddos attacks against 4chan effect at&t subscribers? how does it effect anyone other than the servers that host 4chan? your reasoning makes no sense. DDoS = distributed denial of service
a lot of machines that are on AT&T bandwidth are attacking 4chan's servers
this is bad both for 4chan and for AT&T, because it uses up a lot of bandwidth on both ends
AT&T can only stop this by preventing access to the 4chan server
|
|
Travis it's blocking the inter-tubes so that legitimate users are not able to do whatever they were doing I suppose.
|
On July 27 2009 14:08 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote: can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T? Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:04 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 13:56 Zzoram wrote:UPDATED 6: 4chan’s current gameplan evolving over at Encyclopedia Dramatica (Great stuff!). Also, from reports gathered on Reddit, it seems this block allegedly is because of massive DDoS-attacks against img.4chan.org. The reports doesn’t say anything about why AT&T would block 15.5% of all US internet users from using a specific website without any warning, though. Over-reacting to a normal ISP response of taking down sites that are hit with massive DDoS-attacks until they are stopped? Sounds like 4chan to me. I don't think you know what you are talking about. TO EVERYONE SAYING THEY TOOK IT DOWN BECAUSE OF DDOS ATTACKScould u pls explain the rational behind this? how do the ddos attacks against 4chan effect at&t subscribers? how does it effect anyone other than the servers that host 4chan? your reasoning makes no sense. DDoS = distributed denial of service a lot of machines that are on AT&T bandwidth are attacking 4chan's servers this is bad both for 4chan and for AT&T, because it uses up a lot of bandwidth on both ends AT&T can only stop this by preventing access to the 4chan server
So they can't like track the people doing the DDoS attacks?
|
On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote: can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T? DDOSes typically use tons of compromised personal computers, many of which would using AT&T as an ISP. So the combined bandwidth they're using is immense. If that's the case I dunno why they can't block only the ones that are throwing all their bandwidth 4chan's way though. Maybe this is just a temporary thing til they can set that up.
|
Let's see who wins, AT&T or the Internet. My bet is on the Internet.
|
I can't wait to see the shit storm AT&T is going to find themselves in.
|
Yeahhhh I think AT&T bit off a little more than they could chew.
|
On July 27 2009 14:08 GrandInquisitor wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:03 Gene wrote: can someone explain why 4chan constantly being DDOS'd has any affect on AT&T? Show nested quote +On July 27 2009 14:04 travis wrote:On July 27 2009 13:56 Zzoram wrote:UPDATED 6: 4chan’s current gameplan evolving over at Encyclopedia Dramatica (Great stuff!). Also, from reports gathered on Reddit, it seems this block allegedly is because of massive DDoS-attacks against img.4chan.org. The reports doesn’t say anything about why AT&T would block 15.5% of all US internet users from using a specific website without any warning, though. Over-reacting to a normal ISP response of taking down sites that are hit with massive DDoS-attacks until they are stopped? Sounds like 4chan to me. I don't think you know what you are talking about. TO EVERYONE SAYING THEY TOOK IT DOWN BECAUSE OF DDOS ATTACKScould u pls explain the rational behind this? how do the ddos attacks against 4chan effect at&t subscribers? how does it effect anyone other than the servers that host 4chan? your reasoning makes no sense. DDoS = distributed denial of service a lot of machines that are on AT&T bandwidth are attacking 4chan's servers this is bad both for 4chan and for AT&T, because it uses up a lot of bandwidth on both ends AT&T can only stop this by preventing access to the 4chan server
you don't see the many flaws in this logic?
1.) if the attacks are coming from at&t users, it's at&t's responsibility to shut down those users... 2.) no one ever contacted 4chan about it 3.) the bulk of the attacks were happening quite a while ago 4.) blocking a domain to every user (millions of people), because some people were sending ddos attacks is unprecedented, ridiculous, and a blatant breach of freedoms. 4chan is hardly the only site to face ddos attacks.
but really... #1 is the only one that matters. to block the site because their own users are attacking the site is ridiculous. it's like banning a kid from a public school because some bullies were picking on him.
|
Well 4chan says this is going to be a legit legal battle, but something tells me it'll be a little rougher than that lol
|
4chan isn't organized or serious enough to do anything of significance to a large corporate entity
they've barely done anything to actually harm scientology, and only made themselves look like thugs in the process, which they are, since they just bully kids or individuals that they randomly decide they don't like
fans of the TV show Jericho can get the show back on the air by sending 10,000 pounds of nuts to CBS headquarters, but 4chan can't do anything but stand outside a scientology office with signs with 4chan memes and make angry phone calls to bloggers
|
this should not be considered a "war" of sorts. a DDOS attack means that you have a bajillion people trying to connect to a site in an attempt to flood the server.
AT&T is blocking the site, because many of those bajillions of people connecting to the site are using AT&T. Thus, the easiest, most surefire way to end the DDOS is to block traffic to 4chan, temporarily, from their users.
I don't think this has anything to do with net neutrality.
|
I think the people that are supporting AT&T are not realizing the full extent of the problem. I mean, lots of us are anti-4chan people, but the problem here is CENSORSHIP. The real battle here is for net neutrality and a 'free' internet.
|
konadora
Singapore66161 Posts

This is going to be so good
|
On July 27 2009 14:20 icemac wrote: I think the people that are supporting AT&T are not realizing the full extent of the problem. I mean, lots of us are anti-4chan people, but the problem here is CENSORSHIP. The real battle here is for net neutrality and a 'free' internet.
|
On July 27 2009 14:18 Eggplant wrote: this should not be considered a "war" of sorts. a DDOS attack means that you have a bajillion people trying to connect to a site in an attempt to flood the server.
AT&T is blocking the site, because many of those bajillions of people connecting to the site are using AT&T. Thus, the easiest, most surefire way to end the DDOS is to block traffic to 4chan, temporarily, from their users.
I don't think this has anything to do with net neutrality.
I think that anyone who looks at the history of the internet should disagree with this...
DDOS attacks are not something new. Blocking a domain to an entire nation because some users are making extra traffic is not how any responsible company handles it.
|
I really think people are over reacting. There is no clear evidence that AT&T is trying to censor anyone. This will all blow over in a few days.
|
|
|
|