Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

text.npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

431–440 of 889 posts

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#431

Post by calinet6 »

motohagiography wrote: post #422

This is how the internet is supposed to work. Encounters damage, routes around it. Censorship is damage, and people are routing around it. As someone who never engaged with FB/Twitter from the beginning because I thought they were terrible ideas (all the rules, risks, and challenges of elite-level competition with none of the benefits), I was very glad to read this because this kind of divergence is precisely what cr…

I see it as the opposite: this may be how a technical network is supposed to work, but it's not how a society is supposed to work.

The internet has created the ability for any given subculture to discover instant validation and reinforce their beliefs into a tribe, which further solidifies and extremifies those beliefs.

It's a psychological power almost equivalent to a nuclear reaction: beliefs and ideas that might have naturally died out pre-internet are instead amplified and spread, and dug deeper into peoples' minds.

This is a critical time to be in tech, but not for the growth: for the need to design solutions to that problem. Censorship is a primitive attempt at stopping this psychological nuclear reaction; people are finding ways around it. We need a bigger, better solution to the reaction, lest society destroy itself through unfettered tribalism.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#432

Post by christophilus »

Gene_Parmesan wrote: post #196
least wrote: post #33

When "free speech" is the primary selling point of a social media website, it tends to only attract people who feel slighted by the platform they're migrating from. Unfortunately this has the opposite effect of Parler's stated goal of being "the world's town square" since it simply isn't attractive to people with opposing views of those who did move. I think free speech is important and I think that social media plat…

It's a shame, but it really does feel like "free speech" has become a near dog-whistle. Almost any time I hear of a service billing itself with free speech as a primary selling point, a quick visit is more than enough to turn me off of ever returning. Besides this, there's a clear feedback loop that happens regardless of the intent of the service's creators. The people most likely to get kicked off of social media pl…

I tend to straddle the line between Republican and libertarian, so I consider myself more conservative than liberal. But I have to agree with you. I recently tried out Voat. Holy hell, what a dumpster fire.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#433

Post by sigmaprimus »

Grustaf wrote: post #78
EdwardDiego wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would FB and Twitter be plotting to "silence the right's voice?"

Is this a serious question?

Not really, just a thought experiment.

Truth is I can still see both sides of the political argument, possibly even more so the libratarian point of view, which is a fairly safe place to be ATM.

I believe for bad or worse though that many people have gotten caught up in the frenzy a bit too much during this election cycle and have made morality comprimising decisions on both sides. Maybe it's the Rona driving it, after all so many people have died from it, and the US went to war over 911. Rona is literally exponentially worse as far as the death toll goes, so IDK what is to come but emotions are raw for sure.

I have tried to stay out of the discussions, (taken Dang's advice and waited for things to cool down) then a hit job story about another platform comes out like this one and tries to politicize Parler. So unfortunately I got sucked into the politics too and foolishly weighed in.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#434

Post by blisterpeanuts »

voganmother42 wrote: post #404
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #382

There's a lot of mistaken assumptions and misinformation here about Parler; it looks like most of the commenters haven't actually used it, or have only given it a cursory glance. To wit: 1. Parler is actively recruiting liberals and moderates, to build a "big tent" of diverse opinions and perspectives. 2. The moderation guidelines are quite explicit: don't censor anyone for expressing a political opinion of any sort.…

Really? I see people being banned for mocking conservatives, doesn’t sound free: https://mobile.twitter.com/mmasnick/status/12777231528946810...

Well, there are 4-5 accounts named "Devin Nunes Cow" or some variation thereof. There's no way to tell which one is the "real" Devin Cow. One that I clicked on had the following content:

  I have a confession... my boss, @devinnunes is a closet computer geek. He just bought his first domain!
  
  www.loser.com
Not really the most stellar example of insightful and meaningful content, but it's not been censored, at least not yet in the past three days. It doesn't violate the terms of service, though it's hardly content that most Parler users would be interested in. Maybe on Twitter they find it worthwhile.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#435

Post by watwut »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #344
grey-area wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2020, or more likely 2016 will perhaps be seen as a turning point in the fortunes of the US Republic, when the democracy began to unravel, the law was used as a weapon against enemies, and the rule of law was replaced by mob rule with different factions warring in the streets. The parallels between the US at this moment and pre-war Europe or Rome at the time of the Catiline conspiracy are striking - the centre cannot…

Historians actually point to Vietnam as the point when the average American gave up on their government. Once that happened, the government gave up on the average American, allowed middle class jobs to disappear, and spent more time joining global virtue signaling parties and subsidizing bombs in Yemen than fixing lead pipes in cities.

Which historians? I read quite a loud of American history lately and this is first time I see this claim.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#436

Post by calinet6 »

Schiendelman wrote: post #326
cmsefton wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've long held the opinion that Twitter and Facebook are just content in the medium, a bit like complaining about Sky, CNN or Fox on TV without looking at television itself and the impact it had on communication. The internet has brought communication to everyone that travels at incredible speed. This has the effect of causing emotive responses, rather than reasoned. Requires no effort at all to respond, and encourag…

Increasingly, the medium is the tribe. It’s not clear there are solutions to this because aligning on tribal beliefs is how we evolved to survive!

This is exactly it. The instant communication has created instant reinforcement for the tribe. It's something our minds aren't really ready to handle.

I agree there may not be a solution, given the technology we now have and the minds we'll never improve upon in our lifetimes.

But I think we have to try...

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#437

Post by d_e_solomon »

wyoh wrote: post #261
ardy42 wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. Tech platforms are uncomfortable with certain viewpoints expressed on their platforms and seek to limit these viewpoints. For the most part, those "viewpoints" are verifiable falsehoods, conspiracy theories, and other types of disinformation and misinformation. For instance, the recent migrations to Parler are chiefly people who want to deny the legitimate US presidential election result and spread false claims…

There's sufficient statistical incoherence to warrant skepticism about the US election.

No, there's not. This is the point. The people driving these conspiracies are applying statistical techniques poorly and then parroting their claims on social media.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#438

Post by singemonkey »

LatteLazy wrote: post #410
gameswithgo wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was banned from r/conservative in a discussion about trump handling the coronavirus seriously. I posted a timeline of quotes from him "only 15 cases soon to be none etc" indicating he had not taken it seriously early. Banned after that. Which is fine, I feel that people should be free to form any clubs/groups they want.

I agree broadly though I'd add two caveats: They can't do that AND profess to support free speech within their club. I think people should be able to form their groups as they like. But that doesn't mean that that group is a healthy place or that it doesn't harm wider society. I'm also not clear whether this is a group of people forming under their own initiative (as is their democratic right). Or if its actually som…

> They can't do that AND profess to support free speech within their club.

Sorry, but they can and do.

This is a group of people that will happily shut down your speech while proclaiming themselves to be the defenders of free speech and liberty.

They will happily insult you, but are quick to play victim and complain about being oppressed and harassed and insulted.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#439

Post by LatteLazy »

refurb wrote: post #427
LatteLazy wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They banned anyone parodying Conservatives and also anyone voicing support for antifa. https://www.cato.org/blog/twitter-alternative-they-can-keep-... They also banned fake accounts pretending to be well known people and accounts engaged in illegal activity (death threats etc). I'm fine with that personally, I don't expect them to operate a totally "free" speech service and somehow weather all the lawsuits that bring…

Huh. Well I guess that's the problem. It's hard to have a forum with productive conversations if you aren't willing to filter out "noise", but not everyone agrees with what the noise is. But one could argue (and I'm not arguing that it's the case here), one could have different rules around what's allowed versus Twitter, and it could be a more open forum, but still censored (trolls, deaths threats, "f k you" posts).

I'm happy enough with banning things you have to ban legally and banning pointless comments. But banning anyone supporting antifa is a pretty clear breach. The parody ban (especially the selective application) is another clear breach of free speech.

I'd be content enough if they were upfront and said this is a place for "Conservative opinions only" rather than "free speech". I'd even agree that's their right and that they might get more open and productive discussion that way at least in some cases. But it's just not free speech.

I think that's what frustrates me about this: it's the hypocrisy.

I actually hold a few Conservative opinions myself. But i wouldn't ban people from disagreeing with me AND claim to support free speech...

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#440

Post by drilldrive »

XorNot wrote: post #339
least wrote: post #33

When "free speech" is the primary selling point of a social media website, it tends to only attract people who feel slighted by the platform they're migrating from. Unfortunately this has the opposite effect of Parler's stated goal of being "the world's town square" since it simply isn't attractive to people with opposing views of those who did move. I think free speech is important and I think that social media plat…

"free speech" of this type also doesn't really exist on the internet - because bots are a thing. You can't have a digital equivalent of a town square because whatever else you do, it's simply not possible to create in-person pseudo-anonymous supporters. But on the internet, this is easy - it's a damn service you can buy and it scales on the orders of 1-to-1000 or (usually much more) voices. CAPTCHA's don't solve it -…

This is exactly why I believe a dutiful representation of the 1st amendment in the Internet includes anti-botting measures, since bots flood the town-hall with un-measured broadcasting, shuttering out any and all active speech. But beyond anti-botting and one or two other very minor holds, a public forum should have no other restrictions of moderation. There is an exact restriction needed for the moderation to itself not be speech-impacting either by too much or too little of it.
Post reply on HN