AT&T Reportedly Blocks 4Chan. This Is Going To Get Ugly.

Not to sound completely ignorant,

but what exactly *is* 4Chan and why would anyone want to block them?

reply to post by makkerskilap


Yeah there are periods when nothing special happens. It's entirely up to the users and the content changes fast.

And of course those who own/host the site couldn't possibly have a mirrored copy or just a new site up and running almost immediately could they, it's not like they are have any skills in IT is it!

Also how come so many people here are saying it's the gutter of the internet and contains x and y. The only way you can know this, is if you have been on the site and looked, in which case, why did you look if you are so appalled by it, one click and you have left the site, it's takes more time to actually look about. Surely it's apparent what kind of site you are looking at fairly quickly.

Unless of course you are going by hearsay in which case you don't really know do you.

Originally posted by Teknikal
From what I've read about this AT&T were just blocking the site because of the DDoS attack I actually think they might have really been doing 4chan a favour from the look of the situation.

That's called damage control, AT&T know they've messed up big time and now their trying to talk their way out of it.

AT&T had no reason what so ever to block the site, the ddos attack was against 4chan therefore the only way them blocking the site would have any effect on the attack would be if the attack was originating from AT&T's own network and if that is the case they have a legal obligation to terminate the offending accounts, not block the victim.

If I was the admin of the 4chan I would simple setup a redirect on the server thats being attacked, redirect it to AT&T's servers since they wanted to get involved in something that had nothing to do with them.

btw, for the record, the site is up and running as long as your not using AT&T, it is a little slow at times due to the increased server load. The site is getting a lot of hits but it's not a ddos attack, it's the free advertising that AT&T has given them.

[edit on 27/7/09 by SG-1-9er]

[edit on 27/7/09 by SG-1-9er]

man, i just take this sort of crap from isp's ..sometimes it can be caused by a very innocent error / failure at the providers end (i work for an isp in uk, seen this loads)

this does not seem so innocent and stinks, if this place is so bad the police/fbi or anyone else would have closed them down for their activities. But, they couldnt, and loads of famous people have had their twitter acc' and websites hacked so they decide to bann them?!?! if they werent targeting famous people i guarentee this ban would never have happened, as big companies dont care that the end user is getting attacked, as its their own fault for not being secure.

at the end of the day, its NOT up to isp's to police the internet, its up to the police or law enforcement agencys.

this stinks to high heaven .. simple as that, like stated before in this post, it starts with sites that the majority of people think are bad getting banned, next its the sites that you may like getting banned. Theirs plenty of Real bad nastyness online the isp's coudl be hunting down, but dont, as they think its the polices job, yet in this case they have took the law into their own hands.

needless to say, im helping get and keep this in the google top 100 searches. ive never used/posted or frequented the 4chan, but stuff like this is just wrong and the word needs to get out.


[edit on 27-7-2009 by boaby_phet]

[edit on 27-7-2009 by boaby_phet]

reply to post by SG-1-9er


If it was a reflected attack syn/ack attack or similar it makes perfect sense to me as the img server would be sending constant packets to spoofed addresses.

I'm on /b/'s side though any kind of censorship has the danger of escalating and destroying freedom in general and like I said I have a twisted sense of humour.



[edit on 27-7-2009 by Teknikal]

reply to post by johnb


I was the one who said it was the gutter. I never said that I'm appalled by it.

reply to post by johnb


Yeah . . . I don't think the majority of 4chan would even battle against the idea of being called the gutter of the internet, taken in context. Its not even really meant to be an insult.

And no, I don't hang out there. I have been there, and I know some active members, but I have nothing to do with the place. Or didn't. In this matter I'm in support of them.

Originally posted by soultorent
Like many here I do not support what 4chan stands for.

But I will support to my grave their right to stand for anything, or say anything.

This is the genius of the action if indeed AT&T is responsible for this type pf censorship. It's difficult to support /b/ and at the same time be against CP.

Imagine some poor ACLU representative getting on T.V. and trying to defend /b/. In contrast to an AT&T rep armed with screen captures of extremely disturbing and possibly illegal images. Buh-bye /b/.

AT&T may well get it's first net censorship win and it's all downhill from there. It's a disgusting no-win situation. Blame it on the pervs...or that dude who tryed to scam on e-bay but ended up having his life hacked.

[edit on 27/7/2009 by kosmicjack]

reply to post by johnb

Also how come so many people here are saying it's the gutter of the internet and contains x and y. The only way you can know this, is if you have been on the site and looked, in which case, why did you look if you are so appalled by it, one click and you have left the site, it's takes more time to actually look about. Surely it's apparent what kind of site you are looking at fairly quickly.

I've been there, don't like it very much, but I hope they come out as the victors.

Censorship is wrong no matter what it is. I have the choice to not go there and so I choose not go there. As I have said though I've been there once because the curiosity was was getting to me. It satisfied it curiosity and I hope they win in this battle.

reply to post by kosmicjack

This is the genius of the action if indeed AT&T is responsible for this type pf censorship. It's difficult to support /b/ and at the same time be against CP.

CP is strictly prohibited. moot (the owner of 4chan) does not tolerate it, and the moderators delete the thread/ban the poster within minutes.

The "pedophile rings" are a lie by the MSM. As a frequent user of /b/, I can say that CP is VERY RARELY posted. The ones that do post CP post it for the sake of posting it, and to troll other /b/tards.

Why would someone do that, you ask?

Because they can. Anonymous is a counter-culture. Nothing is sacred and can be corrupted and turned into "lulz." Out of the entire population of /b/tards, I estimate less than 1% to be true pedophiles.

The "No CP" rule is often turned into a joke where the OP says "MODS ARE ASLEEP, POAST CP NAO," and the following posts will be pictures of things with the intials "C.P." (such as Captain Picard, Cold Pasta). The real CP threads are few and far in between, but like I said, the real CP threads don't last longer than a few minutes.

Edit- Oh, and if it makes you feel any better, real CP threads are usually spammed with "OMG MODS GET IN HERE" and sagebombed (spammed to hell and doesn't get bumped.)


[edit on 7/27/2009 by Hyzera]

hell what if .gov was behind posting CP on a site just to get it banned in the first place?

just a thought....

Something I need explaining:
AT&T is claiming that the DDOS'ers were going through their servers and raping their bandwidth. Then why not just block all 4chan? The fact that they specifically went after /b/ is what reeks of censorship.

reply to post by muzzleflash

I don't think so. Like I said, people mostly post CP "for the lulz."

For example:


If it was the government, they would post hardcore CP. Not a photoshopped CP picture with the intent of being funny.

[edit on 7/27/2009 by Hyzera]

reply to post by Zezima


reply to post by muzzleflash



Excellent points!

And why punish the victim - I mean if you could actually characterize /b/ as a victim...

And why are other providers now jumping in?

reply to post by Zezima

That excuse is complete BS. Like I pointed out a few pages back; the DDoS happened 11 days before the AT&T block. Why wait 11 days before blocking a site if it's "raping their bandwidth?"

And you're right. Blocking just the IMG server is very suspicious. Especially since the ZIP server was being ddosed too, and yet that one isn't blocked.

[edit on 7/27/2009 by Hyzera]

reply to post by kosmicjack


They must want them to take down the whole internet to pass what ever kind fascist legislation that they want.

The thing about it though it will be a never ending war. They will just dedicate their lives to taking "internet II" down too.

Worse thing anybody could ever do is mess with people that have all the time in the world. As mentioned earlier.

I don't think ATS has much to worry about, honestly. This site is nothing like that one. If that is the main concern, I wouldn't let it bother you too much.

My biggest concern is that sites like 4chan will further limit the Internet. While you folks are screaming "censorship!," you are drawing plenty of attention to the issue. I have a feeling many folks are oblivious to sites like that. Why are we giving TPTB *further* reasons to try and censor access to the Internet even more?

And no, sites like this did not "always exist." I've been browsing the Internet since '85 or so, and it's nothing now, like it was then. Fast connections, video, and database like sites that, allow instant access to the worst out there. It has changed, and the more folks scream "omg you can't censor it!," the more it will get censored.

There has always been limits on certain things, like pornography, in our society. The more in the open sites like these become, the more those powers will focus on them and limit them.

So if you REALLY wanted to support sites like ATS and the Internet as a whole, you wouldn't be defending sites like 4chan. It's sites like those that will cause the entire tower of cards to come tumbling down.

I only mentioned GTA because it is like 4chan in a way. It was that game in particular, that made certain groups and powers to start further watching, limiting, and rating games. Many games that might have been pretty cool, were watered down to meet some gamer rating so they could sell it to kids. It was GTA that spearheaded that attack on the gaming industry. Yelling "omg it's censorship!' won't stop them from limiting it at the end of the day.

And while some of you may be model parents, unless you put your kid in a bubble, you will not stop their accessing these sorts of sites. There are too many places and ways to do so now.

There is always a work around for traveling the digital universe. In this case it's a cloaking device(gives you an anonymous IP, your IP is stripped away). It's called anonymous web surfing using a proxy server. There are several free one's if you don't mind the pop up ads. Google it and have fun.

reply to post by fleabit

The site, 4chan.org is completely legit. The one single board that is considered the "gutter of the internet" is /b/. The rest of the boards are fine. /a/ for anime, /c/ - cute anime.../x/ - paranormal.

/b/ is the very definition of net neutrality. People on there ACT racist and sexist because they're anonymous (the literal definition of the term). Do you think /b/tards shout memes and make racial slurs in real life? No, they don't. Are they really racist in real life? Less than 1%.

/b/ is all an act. /b/tards are anonymous behind their computer screens and that gives them a freedom they don't have in the real world. They can be as racist and disgusting as they want because they can't be identified. There is no reaction to their action. They can post as much gore and suicide videos as they want! If you don't like it, DON'T GO THERE. It's as simple as that.