Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> We recommend checking our Wikipedia page for the latest domains.

I wonder how wikipedia feels being used as DNS?

EDIT: Apparently this is a well known practice. Some interesting discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40008383





Anna Archive is a notable project. Wikipedia displays links to projects. It's not about "being used as DNS" but about providing basic info about the topic, URL being an important part of it.

Kiwifarms is also a notable web site but they do not show a link to it. This means there is editorialisation going on.

That's a common problem of English, German, and a few more Wikipedia editor gangs seeing themselves as the moral guardians of the internet.

If you switch to some other languages, you'll find the links.


Having a sense of morality is not a problem. Good for them.

[flagged]


Your point is that... Wikpedia editors choice to have articles about sex acts is morally inconsistent with a choice not to have direct links to a site a based around harassing, stalking, doxing, etc that has been directly tied to multiple suicides?

I don't see the connection frankly.

PS. English Wikipedia also does not appear to have an "Anal Creampie" article, let alone one with an animation.


[flagged]


Oh look, an article which isn't titled what you claimed, or about what you claimed, and doesn't include an animation.

Who?

And I still don't see the moral relevance of any of this to choosing not to link to a site that has harassed people into killing themselves.


The picture clearly depicts--and believe it or not I never thought I'd write these words on the Hacker News internet forum sponsored by YCombinator--a vaginal creampie, not an anal one, nor does it seem to be, as you'd previously implied, animated.

How did you found the link?

So I guess your implication is that a catalog of sex acts is somehow immoral?

reasonably explained by the chasm of difference in intent and impact between anna's archive and kiwifarms

[flagged]


What a crazy worldview: to think that good things are good and bad things are bad.

Who is the official judge and jury of the Internet?

In this specific case of what’s allowed on wikipedia: the Wikimedia Foundation

[flagged]


As much as I'd like to claim the values [1] that Wikimedia (the foundation behind wikipedia) supports as a progressive - I think they're quite independent of the progressive/conservative spectrum.

[1] https://wikimediafoundation.org/public-policy/


well I guess if they claim it themselves. I heard Israel doesnt think its comitting genocide, that Russia is rightously doing gods work. Whom did i hear it from? well, themselves of course!

It's none of those things.

As Stephen Colbert once said, "Everyone knows reality has a clear liberal bias."

When conservatism has explicitly turned against enlightenment values, the opposite would be anti-conservative. I'm glad someone hasn't given up the fight.


But this mechanism is used to circumvent DNS blockade. Wikipedia may be next to moderate if they can force DNS providers and even the org registrar to give in, wikipedia could fold too.

Then pastebin, never ending cat and mouse game.


DNS is another layer. The URLs shown on Wikipedia will still have to be resolved to IP addresses, which is where DNS comes in. Referring to Wikipedia for the URLs/domains does nothing to circumvent DNS blockades.

Maybe with the upcoming IP address certificates, we can use IP addresses again. I remember using IP addresses to access some sites in the past.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44379034


Using a wildcard DNS service, you can already do this.

https://sslip.io/ for instance.


Evenn though its onelayer down - the same tactics that were used to suspend/takeover domains would still apply , at the end of the day one still has to get the IPv4/IPv6 address from someone(who can be coerced).

When Trump pressures RIPE NCC or APNIC to deregister an IP address block, that's the end of the internet as we know it, and the return to national networks with very limited interconnection. Even Russia still has address registrations despite being sanctioned.

Alternatively they pressure USA ISPs to block the addresses. That's already regularly done but it probably won't be enough to satisfy the extortion industrial complex which is out for blood.


> When Trump pressures RIPE NCC or APNIC to deregister an IP address block

sed "/Trump/US-Govt/g"

Why do people here always casually single out Trump? He's not an outlier, it's just how US foreign policy has worked for centuries.


"Not an outlier"

A quick look at the last few administrations is all anyone needs to see how this one interprets the powers and duties that come with the office.

One of my favorite phrases coined during the last Trump administration was something like, "not just wrong, but wrong beyond normal parameters." It basically meant exactly what we are discussing here; namely, being an outlier of some sort.


I specifically mentioned foreign policy. There, I don't remember a single US government that was not a net negative for the rest of the world (Israel excluded).

It circumvents the purpose of the DNS block which is meant to prevent people from easily finding the site. Anna's Archive can easily register new domain names and put them on Wikipedia, thus allowing people to easily discover the new location of the site.

Of course many sites can serve as "DNS" - Reddit, Github, X, basically anywhere you can put a URL. So DNS blocking is relatively useless.


Why should wikipedia fold? Can any country put any legitimate pressure against them for just listing a domain.

Linking to illegal services can be illegal, that’s why.

> Linking to illegal services can be illegal, that’s why.

What is illegal in one country can be illegal everywhere.

I don't remember Wikipedia removing LGBTIAQ++ articles just because that's illegal in Iran.

If a government thinks Wikipedia is illegal in their country, they can force local ISP providers to block it, but it's not Wikipedia's responsibility [1] to censor itself.

[1] at least should not be


The Wikimedia Foundation is a US corporation. There are national chapters in some other countries, which are corporations in the respective country. The internet isn't the Wild West; websites are subject to the laws of the countries they operate in.

They can also just create a new foundation elsewhere if the US becomes hostile.

What country does Anna’s archive operate in?

No it's not, at least in US. Google fought and won this case.

Countries can pressure them for many reasons, fairly or not. Under pressure, Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales interfered with a page about the war in Gaza (though I don't know th outcome of that).

Why should registrar/ISP fold?

It's not that they should, they often do though.


https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_DNS

Can’t imagine they care too much given they themselves also run public dns servers.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: