Community for Kel-Tec Shooters banner

21 - 40 of 57 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
31,985 Posts
Well, while it may indeed be that Arfcom had more than its share of "extremist" folks on there talking crazy shenanigans, and that's the supposed justification for taking it down ... one has to wonder where the line is drawn, and if this is a slippery slope. How long before simply discussing the use of firearms becomes "extremist" behavior. Because, y'know, not EVERYONE owns a gun, much less carries one. Why do we have and carry guns? Are we THAT paranoid? Who's out to get us? What are we afraid of? Why don't we trust that the government has our best interests in mind with everything they do? Are we plotting something? Y'know, only someone that was afraid someone was out to get them and/or they were PLANNING to do stuff would have a gun that holds so many rounds and shoots such a powerful cartridge! If we didn't intend to be waging war, why would we want or need or even talk about weapons of war? Why are we being allowed to have a forum where we can discuss this potentially dangerous stuff? And why do we have private messages? Are we HIDING something? Plotting something, perhaps? :eek:

See how the narrative can shift as needed to justify things?

Given, KTOG's policy of avoiding politics in discussions does make for a more welcoming, generally peaceful place to discuss things. But just because we don't discuss politics does not make us immune from OTHERS' politics. Because regardless of where one sits on the political fence, simply owning a firearm and enjoying it as a hobby puts a person solidly in the "THEM" category to certain people. And when those certain people decide that a site hosts something which doesn't suit their needs/wants and they figure there's enough justification and public support that they can get away with doing so, well ... one day you might try to log into KTOG and get this:



Sad thing is, there's not a whole heckuva lot we can do about it until it happens. And then when it does, there's only so much we can do about it after the fact. Escape to another server host and hope they don't refuse to host or they later shut things down for similar reasons? Get a buncha investors or whatever together to set up an independent server and hope it doesn't get hacked and shut down by denial-of-access methods or poisoning the DNS? Beyond that ... dunno. Not trying to stir the pot, just saying ... this stuff IS going on now in ways we haven't seen before, and this ride is juuuuuuust getting started, given the social climate we're in right now.

Very concerning and more than just a little bit scary to think that this could be a sign of things to come online.
Figures. Having ignored my considered opinion about where that line may be drawn and advising against it, you follow up with the kind of unsubstantiated political speculation that fires up and pisses off gun owners, drives angry postings such as found on arfcom, and leads to replies that push that agenda even further. Apparently I just wasted my time and any minute now, ktog, all these, and many more will simply disappear.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,706 Posts
Apparently I just wasted my time and any minute now, ktog, all these, and many more will simply disappear.
Is it likely? I don't know, hopefully not. But it's not out of the realm of possibility in the current environment. When it happens - IF it happens - it will be quick.

I would think it prudent for forum members to contact other member friends via PM and exchange email addresses and/or phone numbers if they want to have a backup way to stay in touch should the unexpected happen. That's not paranoia, that's just trying to be prepared. Just like I buckle up my seatbelt every time I get into a car, despite never having been in a car accident my entire life. I still brush my teeth every day, even though I've never had a cavity, not even in my baby teeth. Trying to think ahead is not paranoia. Now, if I were to show up at your house with a baseball bat and try to force you to brush your teeth, that would be lunacy. Anything can be taken too far. But that is not a reason to ignore a possibility from the get-go, simply because some nut case, somewhere, might take it too far.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
This is something the I have been struggling with personally for some time.

It was about two years ago I started to struggle with free speech, and it bothers me to no end.

Right, wrong, or indifferent I believe one of our greatest strengths (1A protections) has been highjacked for for profits. Frankly if you get into history you could make this case since nearly the day it came to fruition. However with the massive consolidation of power by the neutering of monopoly law starting with Carter and drove home by Regan combined with the dawn of the Information Age... it has created a monster.

It is a monster created by an apparently benign desire. The desire to get that click. And what gets the most clicks? Stuff that pisses you off generally. This is a fact. Google, Facebook, et al. algorithmically drives you to content that keeps you clicking. They employ psychologist and spend billions of dollars on polishing their ability addict their users to their platforms and dive as much engagement as possible. Bings, and notifications spaced and timed to keep your attention and release dopamine. All done with little more tact than rows of slots on a casino floor, all driving you towards anger, and hate. Both addicting addicting as well.

Am I sad Parler is gone? No. Did you go there ever? Crazy toxic. Massive amounts of hate and disinformation, wild speculation, open calls for bloodshed, and overt racism was all over the place. Was there good content, sure. There was a lot of bad content as well. I've seen a good friend of mine radicalized, and frankly loose touch with reality due to Parler and the like. You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, that is not free speech, that is a crime.

On the flip side how do you stop censorship from growing and twisting into a problem FAR worse that yelling "fire" in a crowded theater? Who becomes the arbitrator here? I don't have the answers frankly, I'm not sure anyone does.

I only encourage you to become actively engage with your local government, and representatives at the state and federal level to address our lackluster monopoly laws and to get tighter regulations around these massive corporations to rebalance the scales some here. After much consternation this is where I have personally landed on as the best action forward to address this problem. Send that email, pick up that phone, run for office if you're inclined so. Let us not perpetuate what others started to simply line their pockets and seek rent. Perhaps I'm just ever the deluded optimist. :unsure:
 

·
Grand Poobah
Joined
·
1,368 Posts
I had an account over on Arfcom, but never posted. I mainly just searched for answers to my questions about that kind of rifle, and ammunition. Pretty much anything I might ask had already been answered.

buzzsaw

“Just because you do not take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you.”
―Pericles
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
the point businesses (and i put running a forum like this) is to not buy into the hype of cloud services. the fact that despite all the salesman tells you, your data and applications , as we now see, are so secure. If you don't own and control the means to support (or at least recover and come back up) you are not secure. You now see that the owner of the cloud can and will use their access as leverage over you and as we all know, cheap is sometimes not so cheap
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,706 Posts
If you don't own and control the means to support (or at least recover and come back up) you are not secure.
Exactly why I run my own separate backup servers. And why I run my own cloud. My own picture hosting service. My own media servers. Etc. None in the cloud. All are on servers that I own and control 100%. I would also point out, none on Windows. But that's a different security concern. We're talking about cloud services here, and the ability for their providers to intentionally shut you down in a microsecond. Anything you have in the cloud is not yours and you could lose access to it at any time - accidentally or intentionally. And others have access to it (your cloud provider, and by way of them the government), even when you've been shut out. That's scary to me.

Is hosting your own as convenient as using someone else's cloud offerings? Of course not. That's because convenience and security are opposing concepts. You have to choose which is more important to you - convenience OR security ... you don't get both at the same time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
bean counters and most execs don't understand and/or care. First is cutting cost ( and getting rid of those troublesome IT people always bringing up reality), second and in my experience is their ego. They meet with peers and hear about how they are doing this newest great thing and are afraid to not be "cutting edge" too. Just like QAT, 6-sigma, team building, ISO, and so on . all had good goals, but they would be beaten into us until a new VP or CEO came in who had just been to some seminar on the next newest and be-all and end-all program, then the last program would just fade away, but never be officially cancelled...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
bean counters and most execs don't understand and/or care. First is cutting cost ( and getting rid of those troublesome IT people always bringing up reality), second and in my experience is their ego. They meet with peers and hear about how they are doing this newest great thing and are afraid to not be "cutting edge" too. Just like QAT, 6-sigma, team building, ISO, and so on . all had good goals, but they would be beaten into us until a new VP or CEO came in who had just been to some seminar on the next newest and be-all and end-all program, then the last program would just fade away, but never be officially cancelled...
Getting off topic here, but it sounds like you do not work in a healthy organization and you are the tail end of these goals. Things like ISO are continuous in nature. Not sure on your role but lumping QAT in with those other items is probably my biggest red flag on probable org health issues here. The weaker (and larger) the organization, the harder it is to filter these things down and get value out of them. I would advise not exposing these views during an interview ;)

Source: I have a fancy title, though am still very much hands on keyboard as an implementer. Besides new and experimental product development I also do cross team consulting to help teams get value out of such stuff in practical ways. My organization has no need for non-technical Sr. staff / management. Usually this last bit is why organizations are weak in my opinion; the people that know better are not empowered. Those that are making decisions often don't understand how to implement and comply w/o introducing a bunch of headaches.

Once an organization gets to a certain size you simply can't work without many of these things in an efficient manner. Org structure and composition is also critical, and often overlooked when it come to these things... but now we are way off topic.

Back on topic: I agree cost is the driving factor here. It is simply too quick and easy using 'the cloud' but even that has workarounds with containers. Where you can just ship that container to 3rd party services or your own servers... but even this cost more, a lot more, than what you would think than leveraging some of these cloud APIs that get you vender locked.

Then we are ignoring that even if you have your own hardware, where does that hardware live, and who is providing the pipe? Eventually you are at the mercy of tier 3 backbone providers and if they don't route your traffic... you could create your own? Then what if others don't peer? Self hosting still only gets you so far and is not practical for many use cases.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
Getting off topic here, but it sounds like you do not work in a healthy organization and you are the tail end of these goals. Things like ISO are continuous in nature. Not sure on your role but lumping QAT in with those other items is probably my biggest red flag on probable org health issues here. The weaker (and larger) the organization, the harder it is to filter these things down and get value out of them. I would advise not exposing these views during an interview ;)

Source: I have a fancy title, though am still very much hands on keyboard as an implementer. Besides new and experimental product development I also do cross team consulting to help teams get value out of such stuff in practical ways. My organization has no need for non-technical Sr. staff / management. Usually this last bit is why organizations are weak in my opinion; the people that know better are not empowered. Those that are making decisions often don't understand how to implement and comply w/o introducing a bunch of headaches.

Once an organization gets to a certain size you simply can't work without many of these things in an efficient manner. Org structure and composition is also critical, and often overlooked when it come to these things... but now we are way off topic.

Back on topic: I agree cost is the driving factor here. It is simply too quick and easy using 'the cloud' but even that has workarounds with containers. Where you can just ship that container to 3rd party services or your own servers... but even this cost more, a lot more, than what you would think than leveraging some of these cloud APIs that get you vender locked.

Then we are ignoring that even if you have your own hardware, where does that hardware live, and who is providing the pipe? Eventually you are at the mercy of tier 3 backbone providers and if they don't route your traffic... you could create your own? Then what if others don't peer? Self hosting still only gets you so far and is not practical for many use cases.
thank god i retired and no longer have to listen to and pretend to believe. 30+ years in IT at 3 fortune 500 high tech companies and what you have espoused is exactly what was said about all of those programs. By the way, have you ever played BS bingo?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
thank god i retired and no longer have to listen to and pretend to believe. 30+ years in IT at 3 fortune 500 high tech companies and what you have espoused is exactly what was said about all of those programs. By the way, have you ever played BS bingo?
For what it is worth I’ve 25 years and probably unlike any executive you have encountered. Many of my peers have masters and PHDs and I a high school diploma. I got to my position by doing. I’ve quite the nose for BS and stand against it, not play games when exposed to it. It has been a hard fought 25 year journey and have overwhelmingly positive feedback from my team, peers, and leadership today. My opinions are just that, though developed via empirical means. My metrics and practical results speak for themselves. IT is hard, most places screw it up. Sorry you seem to have never been exposed in your 30+ years to a good organization or fought successfully to fix the ones you where in (how I personally got where I did).

Thanks for the soft ad hominem though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
For what it is worth I’ve 25 years and probably unlike any executive you have encountered. Many of my peers have masters and PHDs and I a high school diploma. I got to my position by doing. I’ve quite the nose for BS and stand against it, not play games when exposed to it. It has been a hard fought 25 year journey and have overwhelmingly positive feedback from my team, peers, and leadership today. My opinions are just that, though developed via empirical means. My metrics and practical results speak for themselves. IT is hard, most places screw it up. Sorry you seem to have never been exposed in your 30+ years to a good organization or fought successfully to fix the ones you where in (how I personally got where I did).

Thanks for the soft ad hominem though.
sorry, there were a lot of very bad days(years) made so by bad upper management and financially i just had to take the beatings until i could walk out early. it's been 12 great years since but there are scars...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
I hear you brother, I’ve my own scars. I’ve been through plenty of toxic organizations. Been shown the door being demonstrably right, etc. I’ve been equal parts lucky and good to get where I’m at now.

Maybe not even 5 years ago I would of largely agreed with you.

Let’s get back on topic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,696 Posts
Discussion Starter #34
Sooooo, the site is back up now, but apparently it's had to find a new means of existing - they switched hosting server companies or whatever (I dunno, I'm fairly 'Net-stupid with this stuff, I don't know the terms ... and I'm sleepy). Explanation in the video herein at about 0:53:


I'm still bothered by the fact that they had to make such a move to continue to exist. On the plus side, they had the means and connections to get with another domain provider whatchamacallit thingymadoo (again, I don't know things), but it does beg the question: What about other sites that don't have such contingencies in place if/when they get shut down because the Internet powers-that-be don't like what's on their site? Does KTOG have such Plan B's and C's in place? What about other sites? Is this a "thing" now? ... having to keep a backup site domain provider whatever company available, and/or the funding and hardware on hand to be able to just run the whole thing on your own outta your house if need be, JUST IN CASE someone's political whims cause them to say, "Guns BAD! Me no like gun website! Me delete!" and make it go bye-bye? When does it cross the line from "it's a private company, they can dictate terms of service/usage as they please" and go into "yeahhhhh, that First Amendment thing allowing you to discuss things related to Second Amendment? Yeahhhh, we don't like that, sooooo ... DELETED!" and become a constitutional issue?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,706 Posts
...that First Amendment thing allowing you to discuss things related to Second Amendment? Yeahhhh, we don't like that, sooooo ... DELETED!" and become a constitutional issue?
It's not a constitutional issue unless the government does it. You have no First Amendment rights with a private company. The First Amendment starts out, "Congress shall make no law..." It doesn't say squat about what Amazon or Google or Facebook or Twitter can do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
It's not a constitutional issue unless the government does it. You have no First Amendment rights with a private company. The First Amendment starts out, "Congress shall make no law..." It doesn't say squat about what Amazon or Google or Facebook or Twitter can do.
Soooo you are saying private businesses have the right to do business with who they wish no matter what? Go ahead open a coffee shop and exclude people you want based on Religion or skin color. A small private shop discriminating is a small matter compared to being able to control the public flow of knowledge yet we would be reading about it 24/7 for a month on the net. These organizations are huge, they control the major source of information in these modern times. It would be like the only delivery company refusing to distribute papers that do not promote the official narrative before electronic media. The answers are not simple but issues of a few controlling assets of major need and importance have been addressed before. The control of information is a far more important matter than who supplies or sets the price of your gas or aluminum.
What is to be done to remedy this situation? While it is clearly above my pay grade to come up with a suitable solution it is clear the issue needs to be resolved. He who controls the narrative controls the mind and conscience of the people.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,538 Posts
Sooooo, the site is back up now, but apparently it's had to find a new means of existing - they switched hosting server companies or whatever (I dunno, I'm fairly 'Net-stupid with this stuff, I don't know the terms ... and I'm sleepy). Explanation in the video herein at about 0:53:

...
I must admit I've never visited AR15.com but I thought it was a gun site. When I saw this video link with the little arrow thingie blocking the middle I thought it said ARF.com. With the image I thought I'd stumbled onto a canine cosplay something or the other & got confused.

Actually I'm still confused but I guess AR guys have their little quirks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
Soooo you are saying private businesses have the right to do business with who they wish no matter what? Go ahead open a coffee shop and exclude people you want based on Religion or skin color. A small private shop discriminating is a small matter compared to being able to control the public flow of knowledge yet we would be reading about it 24/7 for a month on the net. These organizations are huge, they control the major source of information in these modern times. It would be like the only delivery company refusing to distribute papers that do not promote the official narrative before electronic media. The answers are not simple but issues of a few controlling assets of major need and importance have been addressed before. The control of information is a far more important matter than who supplies or sets the price of your gas or aluminum.
What is to be done to remedy this situation? While it is clearly above my pay grade to come up with a suitable solution it is clear the issue needs to be resolved. He who controls the narrative controls the mind and conscience of the people.
So in layman’s terms google maps removed there street address. The house still exist. You may still get to it. However you had to already know the location.

thektog.org is a friendly name that must be looked up before you can talk to the servers and get the site. It was this looking up that godaddy turned off.

arfcom then switched to Epic for domain services.

I question the claims that their are backups on top of backups on this topic, at least from something practical.

If you just go up the flag pole another step you run into ICANN:ICANN - Wikipedia

ICANN can block any domain name. And does as so out of need today. For example domain names must follow RFCs (agreements on how the internet works at a technical level). They usually are more permissive though. To my knowledge they have been more and more permissive through time i.e. swear words could not be in a domain name. There used to only be one domain name registry. etc.

There are other workarounds even the like TOR: The Tor Project | Privacy & Freedom Online

Often referred to as the dark web. Many issues here as well and here is where I start to say things are not practical, and other workarounds break the internet to some degree.

Take a good look at this tool: Ajit Pai - Wikipedia

He has done more to damage the internet then any single person in history in enabling these type of issues from my evaluation. If those pesky regulations he killed off are not restored then this is just the start to these issues, but that may go against some of the narrative here.

In the end we are talking about a network designed from the ground up to survive a nuclear attack. It will find a way to route around damage, even political.

The other major threat I see to freedom here is the unconstitutional Patriot act. I have been fighting this fight since day one.

I welcome all the new found interest now that people are seeing the affects of these laws and policies.

Your favorite politician may not hold up under these topics though. In fact very few do. It isn’t divisive as few understand it; as the saying goes money talks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
96 Posts
It's not a constitutional issue unless the government does it. You have no First Amendment rights with a private company. The First Amendment starts out, "Congress shall make no law..." It doesn't say squat about what Amazon or Google or Facebook or Twitter can do.
So Congress can pass a law to regulate de facto monopolies and prevent them from having more practical power then the people and government? 🤔
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,706 Posts
Soooo you are saying private businesses have the right to do business with who they wish no matter what?
You are conflating two completely different things, "unconstitutional" and "illegal". I was speaking to the "constitutional issues", as evidenced by my post explicitly saying "It's not a constitutional issue unless the government does it." The Constitution constrains government, not individual businesses. Laws constrain individual businesses. Thus, a business telling you that you can't speak your mind on their premises is not unconstitutional. Many people who don't know the difference scream that their constitutional rights are being violated every time they get offended. This is not true.
 
21 - 40 of 57 Posts
Top