Not signed in (Sign In)
  1.  (6449.1)
    So I don't have a huge interest in 4chan specifically but I think this will be an interesting situation. From the site I found:

    Firing one of the first shots in the net neutrality war, AT&T has blocked 4chan’s /b/ image board. AT&T subscribers are unable to connect to /b/ and /r9k/ (both of which are hosted on However, subscribers can get on any of the so-called «worksafe» boards that offers.
    UPDATED 1: Confirmation comes from several Reddit users that the website has indeed been blocked in a number of areas in the US and that it is not a technical issue.

    This is starting to spread all over the net, though, and there's no telling which site will have the most up to date news so just google it when you read this.

    Or, better yet, follow 4chan4ever on Twitter to keep up to date.

    Being unemployed and not having much to do tomorrow, I will be following this with much anticipation and glee. I don't like the idea of the internet being censored and I can't wait to see how 4chan responds.

    Of course, AT&T could realize how much shit they're about to be in and quickly reverse their decision...
    • CommentAuthorAnanzitusq
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2009
    this can't end well.
    • CommentAuthorRenThing
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2009
    Well, I'm on AT&T DSL (don't look at me like that, it's cheaper than cable in my area and I was poor when I signed up for it) an I can connect to /b/ and /r9k/
  2.  (6449.4)
    An article at The Consumerist just went up, and they're pretty good about updating their articles as new developments occur so I'll link to them.
    • CommentAuthorKosmopolit
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2009 edited
    Could 4chan simply set up a mirror site on a different server with a dynamic ISP address?
    • CommentAuthorlooneynerd
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2009

    Yes, they could. But anything Anon does is done in a manner similar to holy war. Get riled up by an authority (different members of anon) spouting lofty ideals, send frenzied minions at the target of rage, and then things slowly peter out as people lose interest. They swore they wouldn't rest until Scientology was no more, and look how well that worked out...
  3.  (6449.7)
    Yeah, I'm kind of wishing they had taken Scientology down, but let's face it: AT&T is a much easier target. Any damage done from 4chan attacks notwithstanding, they're a huge company centered around capitalism; any big PR storm where they're the bad guy is seriously going to hurt their business.

    I'm just waiting to see which one hurts them worse, the bad PR or the 4chan attacks...
    • CommentAuthorpi8you
    • CommentTimeJul 26th 2009
    Except, of course, if you've got a legal monopoly on DSL in the area and your alternatives aren't much better...

    I'm rooting for the /b/ side, of course.

    Also, as a possible sign of tomorrow's actions:
    /b/ vs ATT
  4.  (6449.9)

    That's fucking awesome. I sincerely hope AT&T tries to fight this.

    Personally, I hope they incorporate Billy Mays into it somehow. I don't know how they'd do it but if I knew I'd be one of them then, wouldn't I?
    • CommentAuthor/
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    You can't take down <a href="">the psychic infrastructure of America</a>. Because we've got <strong>lizard people.</strong>

    <img src="" alt="" />
    <img src="" alt="" />

    <strong>LIIIZAAARD PEEEEOPLE</strong><em><ul>
    • CommentAuthorOddcult
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    They swore they wouldn't rest until Scientology was no more, and look how well that worked out...

    That's still ongoing. Arguably, Scientology has been completely changed by what Anonymous did. Many, many individuals got out of the cult as a direct result and the pre-existing opposition movement has been rejuvenated, with many of the moralfag Anons joining their ranks. The media no longer kills any CoS related stories out of fear of being sued, as there's so much evidence now available to back up criticisms, thanks to Anon.

    If John Travolta leaves, comes out and speaks out, it almost certainly will be all over, and apparantly he's teetering on the brink of it.

    But anyway - that's for another discussion. Anonyomous won't necessarily regard this as a grave insult to free speech, so much as someone inviting them to conduct shenannigans. I'm sure fun will be had.
    • CommentAuthorpi8you
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    Oh great, Cogent may be joining in the fun, sayeth the moot:
    Cogent Communications has joined the club—they're now blocking all of 4chan. I can't even access the site at this point.

    We're working on it...
    • CommentAuthorAnanzitusq
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    I risk sounding annoying but I'll repeat:

    this cannot end well.
    • CommentAuthor/
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    @ Ananzitusq - Yeah, nothing ever does. I'm post this anyway.

    <img src="" alt="" />
    • CommentAuthorAnanzitusq
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    @ Sleepless:


    I'm reading a book instead of sleeping, so I'm curious to see when the lulz will be carried out. This is interesting to me because while yes, it's lulz for 4chan (least we forget), it is also a defense of net neutrality. hmm.
    • CommentAuthor/
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    I don't know, man. I'm afraid that talking about the lulz might keep the lulz from being carried out. I'm superstitious like that. I don't even like having my picture taken.
    Maybe these are the lulz? Fuck, who knows...
    • CommentAuthorAnanzitusq
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    Do you think places like 4chan need to exist?

    That they serve some purpose in regulating the vastness of net-culture? I'm probably overstating their importance, but I've always looked at them as a giant safety-valve.
    • CommentAuthor/
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    I think of it as the last bastion of democracy. But then again, I'm just a drunk, uneducated loser who wouldn't have a voice in a meritocracy, so yeah. I'm looking out for me here.
    • CommentAuthorFlabyo
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    Hard to find any signal amongst all the noise about this, but it does seem that AT&T might have done this because of complaints from their customers about DDoS attacks involving that IP range.
    • CommentAuthorAnanzitusq
    • CommentTimeJul 27th 2009
    @ sleepless:

    man, being drunk sounds awesome right now. I've got a few bottles of Guinness in the fridge waiting.

    @ Flabyo:

    Yeah, i read that too at the consumist link posted above. If that is the real reason, do you think a solution that works for everybody is possible?