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

Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

buzzfeednews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 1001 posts

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#421

Post by dlevine »

mbesto wrote: post #373
nicbou wrote: post #11

Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…

> We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the population out of public debate They didn't exist in the public debate to begin with. Social media opened that up. We're realizing just how negatively impactful a village idiot with a megaphone the size of a city block can be.

This reminds me strongly of the wait but why article on Overton windows. Highly recommended for anyone interested in this sort of stuff.

https://waitbutwhy.com/2019/09/american-brain.html

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#423

Post by zests »

gamblor956 wrote: post #391
Mountain_Skies wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already know from history what happens when large groups are disenfranchised from the public sphere. Violence. Lots of it. And once it starts, it's not easily stopped. Some welcome this because they think it can be managed for their own purposes. But once civil order breaks down, things simply accelerate with no possibility of talk being able to stop it anymore. It takes on a life of its own. Those who dream of th…

These groups became violent while still enfranchised. And they're still enfranchised: they can still vote, and still post to the internet, and still talk to people outside. They simply no longer get a free internet loud speaker to envangelize to others.

Everyone is enfranchised but some people are more enfranchised than others.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#424

Post by smitty1e »

This is outsourcing tyranny to "private" industry.

This is an unexpected paraphrase of David Wheeler: "All problems in political science can be solved by another level of indirection".

Conservatives may have the personalities of dented wastebaskets, but they really haven't been as monstrous as what's on the horizon.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#426

Post by lanstin »

nicbou wrote: post #153
bjtitus wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. Well these last two seem pretty par for the course for illegitimate claims been promoted as legitimate. At a certain point the line of absurdity has been crossed at it is not the duty of society to constantly debunk illegitimate claims. > The other side keeps deplatforming them In this particular case, Parler has been host to a num…

Yes, that is what reddit, twitter and Hacker News reinforce constantly. It's either because it's true, or because the other side has been repeatedly discouraged from adding their two cents in those communities. I've been seeing the world through this lens for so long that I can't tell. I find it somewhat implausible that half the population is dumb, racist and all those other labels. It seems much more likely that I…

When I study history of various places and times, fifty percent of the population has often done a lot of questionable things, especially at the behest of leaders willing to use irrational divisions, like skin color, to enhance their power over that fifty percent. And, to tie it to ycombinator, isn’t the software motto 80% of everything is crap?

And to semi-agree with your paean to understanding, there are people whose actions I deplore and whom I know well enough to glimpse thru their eyes, and the combination of constant emotional disregulation and self-centered ness means one can try quite hard to be good and be nothing be a source of evil actions. Understanding this emotional reality has helped me to stay clear headed when confronted with the maelstrom, but has not lessened my determination to oppose the actions.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#427

Post by [deleted] »

guscost wrote: post #342
CraigRood wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These platforms exist for the purpose of capturing content that has been “deplatformed”. >Speak freely and express yourself openly, without fear of being “deplatformed” for your views. Engage with real people, not bots. Parler is people and privacy-focused, and gives you the tools you need to curate your Parler experience. Parler frontpage. They have no intention of creating a real alternative to Twitter. Lets be hon…

You are twisting yourself into a logical pretzel to avoid answering. And no, harmful content does not get you deplatformed if it harms the right people: https://twitter.com/chineseembinus/status/134724760209453465...

[deleted]

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#428

Post by bjustin »

nicbou wrote: post #11

Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…

The ones radicalizing these people are responsible for squeezing them out of public debate. What if these people were going around insisting the Earth is flat, trying to force other people to agree with you, then increasingly lashing out when others don't agree? Oh, and they are picking up new adherents by doing this as well.

Consistent enforcement of the rules (which Apple is not good at, I will say) would have avoided this becoming such a problem. Parler has been a cesspit for its whole existence, as far as I know, and approximately nobody would have cared if Apple never let them on the App Store. And fewer people would blindly believe that the earth is flat.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#429

Post by Tokkemon »

RspecMAuthortah wrote: post #260
caconym_ wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is “the other route”? They are being deplatformed because their speech is violent and damaging—in many cases it’s literal incitement to violence. Their legal cases are being rejected because they have no legal merit. The mainstream media refuse to take them seriously because they have again and again shown themselves to be bad faith actors, peddlers of unsubstantiated conspiracy, outright liars, and so on. I don…

But the thing with these sweeping generalizations of "them" as being violent and damaging is - who gets to define what is violent and damaging? Glenn Greenwald, who I respect a lot and was instrumental in breaking the mass surveillance in US by intelligence agencies recently spoke about these very issue: " My insistence that we look at the other side of the ledger — the costs and dangers not only from such attacks bu…

After the Capitol attack, it is clearly no longer inflated. It has boiled over.

Re: Apple has threatened to ban Parler from the App Store

#430

Post by Anon1096 »

chrischen wrote: post #388
nicbou wrote: post #11

Someone brought an interesting perspective in another thread and I can't shake it off. The other side keeps deplatforming them. Their legal cases are rejected. The mainstream media refuses to take them seriously. We're not even listening to them, because it's science and they're *ists if they disagree. We're not debating anymore. We just assume we're right. We are slowly squeezing a significant segment of the populat…

They were never part of public debate. They were just talking amongst themselves, showing each other what they wanted to hear, and validating their own beliefs in a downwards spiral towards eventual extremism. This is enabled by the internet more than any specific social network. It's like sending someone to prison and expecting them to turn into a law abiding citizen: hard when all your peers are also criminals. Now…

>They were never part of public debate. They were just talking amongst themselves, showing each other what they wanted to hear, and validating their own beliefs in a downwards spiral towards eventual extremism.

Isn't the exact opposite true as well then? If one side is siloed, by definition the other side must be in an opposite silo. You've taken it upon yourself to define that your side is in the "public debate" and therefore somehow isn't just "talking amongst themselves". Don't you see the issue here? Left Twitter/Reddit/Facebook absolutely exists, and they are not meaningfully conversing with the other side.

And, if anything, having a sitting president on your side should by definition mean that you are "part of the public debate", since everyone at least hears the president's words (and especially Trump's).

Post reply on HN