Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store • Hacker News Board

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#301

Post by blisterpeanuts » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

guscost wrote: post #198

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why did they do it? There's video footage showing cops literally pulling back the barricades and waving people in. I don't understand why they did that, and surely their not doing that would have prevented the subsequent violence?

Another explanation is that it is “the blue” getting back at the left: https://www.wbez.org/amp/stories/chicago-police-union-presid... Or, maybe the CIA just manipulated the blue into doing this! Conspiracy inception!

I mean, Occam's Razor would suggest that the simplest explanation is also the most likely: the police made a mistake.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#302

Post by tw600040 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

mumblemumble wrote: post #252

Nacdor wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why so many Democrats were allowed to encourage the BLM riots (more than 25 dead, $2 billion in property damage) without so much as a peep from Google, Twitter, Facebook or any other tech giant. Kamala Harris said "they should not stop" and helped with a bail fund for the people who were involved with them. I think protest is a fundamental requirement of democracy, and as Chris Cuomo himself reminded us:…

It's all pretty complicated, but one obvious mitigating factor is the ends being pursued by each movement. Rioting aside, BLM is ultimately pushing for justice and equality. There's also a question of blame - many would argue that most of the BLM rioting was provoked by a disproportionate police response. This movement, on the other hand, is quite transparently rooted in white supremacy, and had an explicit goal of t…

//Rioting aside?

Aside? isn't that the whole point?

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#303

Post by djsumdog » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #243

danijelb wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Real censorship means that the government prosecutes you for speech, no matter where or how or to whom are you saying it. That was happening in parts of Europe from 1945 to 1990. This what is happening in USA right now is nowhere near that. It's just free market. If you're banned from a certain platform you can reach your audience in another way. No one is censoring your speech. It's just a certain company not wantin…

I made this comment in another thread but I think we are few year from it being forced by the Supreme Court as it has ruled very close to this in the past. > ... noting that ownership "does not always mean absolute dominion." The court pointed out that the more an owner opens his property up to the public in general, the more his rights are circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who are inv…

I hope everyone else walks away before then.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#304

Post by refurb » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

codecamper wrote: post #242

refurb wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With the new War on Domestic Terror(TM) ramping up, I think the tech companies see a business opportunity for a private-public partnership to save the republic. We can silence dangerous speech with no concerns about the 1st amendment (it's a private platform after all). All your Whatsapp chats can now be mined by Facebook (which the NSA will have access to as well). And the switch that controls social media communica…

They were domestic terrorists and they will stand trial. And whoever organized the event will hopefully be tried for treason. With a punishment that is appropriate for that crime.

Exactly. Now is not the time to be quibbling about constitutional rights or the influence of big tech on political discourse. We'll deal with all that petty stuff when the crisis is over.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#305

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

mumblemumble wrote: post #252

Nacdor wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why so many Democrats were allowed to encourage the BLM riots (more than 25 dead, $2 billion in property damage) without so much as a peep from Google, Twitter, Facebook or any other tech giant. Kamala Harris said "they should not stop" and helped with a bail fund for the people who were involved with them. I think protest is a fundamental requirement of democracy, and as Chris Cuomo himself reminded us:…

It's all pretty complicated, but one obvious mitigating factor is the ends being pursued by each movement. Rioting aside, BLM is ultimately pushing for justice and equality. There's also a question of blame - many would argue that most of the BLM rioting was provoked by a disproportionate police response. This movement, on the other hand, is quite transparently rooted in white supremacy, and had an explicit goal of t…

[deleted]

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#306

Post by robbseaton » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

lallysingh wrote: post #213

Nacdor wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why so many Democrats were allowed to encourage the BLM riots (more than 25 dead, $2 billion in property damage) without so much as a peep from Google, Twitter, Facebook or any other tech giant. Kamala Harris said "they should not stop" and helped with a bail fund for the people who were involved with them. I think protest is a fundamental requirement of democracy, and as Chris Cuomo himself reminded us:…

No coup. And quite a few employees from those companies were in those protests. And there are different arguments for merit between those protests. And the vast majority of the BLM protests we're peaceful. This one (sample size 1) was quite the opposite. Pipe bombs, small arms, etc.

More than 200 BLM protests turned violent.

https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-vi...

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#307

Post by systemvoltage » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

mumblemumble wrote: post #252

Nacdor wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious why so many Democrats were allowed to encourage the BLM riots (more than 25 dead, $2 billion in property damage) without so much as a peep from Google, Twitter, Facebook or any other tech giant. Kamala Harris said "they should not stop" and helped with a bail fund for the people who were involved with them. I think protest is a fundamental requirement of democracy, and as Chris Cuomo himself reminded us:…

It's all pretty complicated, but one obvious mitigating factor is the ends being pursued by each movement. Rioting aside, BLM is ultimately pushing for justice and equality. There's also a question of blame - many would argue that most of the BLM rioting was provoked by a disproportionate police response. This movement, on the other hand, is quite transparently rooted in white supremacy, and had an explicit goal of t…

BLM was a badly organized movement. I support the cause, not the way they're sending the message.

Study Gandhi, MLK, John Lewis, Mandela - I understand BLM is a decentralized movement, but that's the problem. There is no leader and leadership. It has no coherency. It's dividing the society even more instead of pulling the entire populace behind it.

Social movement has a singular goal - to change the minds of people that oppose their views. BLM has managed to just bring out people who were already supporting them, it hasn't quite changed the hearts of people that were previously racists.

This is not how you make progress in the society. It is "pull", not "push".

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#308

Post by JW_00000 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

anonacct38 wrote: post #151

post_break wrote: post #4

Wow, is this the great purge? I don’t support certain people, but man I don’t think this is going to end well. This censorship just seems crazy to me.

If wal-mart stops selling a brand of ice cream, is that censorship? Is it censorship that wal-mart doesn't sell playboy in their store? If not, then why is the removal of an app from the app store censorship? The world wide web still exists. Parler is still on the internet. Seems like there should be some acknowledgement that there's a difference between refusing to actively participate in distributing content and ce…

This is more akin to Walmart not selling certain magazines or books because they don't like their (political) content. You could also compare it to when the Catholic Church had a black list of "heretical" books and pressured their removal. Both are legal, but maybe not desirable?

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#309

Post by blake1 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:18 AM UTC

Nacdor wrote: post #150

dleslie wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost like there was some sort of catalyst event that occurred very recently that would provoke such a response. /s

I'm curious why so many Democrats were allowed to encourage the BLM riots (more than 25 dead, $2 billion in property damage) without so much as a peep from Google, Twitter, Facebook or any other tech giant. Kamala Harris said "they should not stop" and helped with a bail fund for the people who were involved with them. I think protest is a fundamental requirement of democracy, and as Chris Cuomo himself reminded us:…

Please provide a source for your claim that Democrats encouraged riots. To the best of my recollection, no one encouraged riots, except for extremist groups like the “boogaloo boys.” Certainly no mainstream political party encouraged violence this summer.

I’d you want, I will provide a source that Republicans encouraged violence this year.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#310

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 1:19 AM UTC

lovecg wrote: post #298

ralph84 wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social media companies are protected by Section 230 while newspapers and magazines aren't. If social media companies are going to act like newspapers and magazines then they shouldn't be shielded from liability for their content.

So in other words you want them to remove even more content (no one wants to be held liable for Trump’s tweets)? Sounds pro-censorship to me.

[deleted]