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

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#751

Post by jakelazaroff » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 5:46 AM UTC

djsumdog wrote: post #575

flunhat wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly -- I love the pearl-clutching tone of these of slippery-slope complaints: "Just you wait, leftists! One day the power of the state shall be visited upon you, and then you'll see! How would you feel if the government censored you, infiltrated your gatherings, and sidelined you from mainstream society? Hmmmmm?"

> pearl-clutching Pearl clutching? Odd. I've heard people say that all summer long about those afraid of the "peaceful protests" turned violent riots that burned down cities and devastated business. This violence was encouraged by all types of politicians on the left and all the big media networks as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQzLcO5qhY A small number of people at an almost entirely non-violent rally, a…

> a rally where the president encouraged people to "walk down to the capitol house" .. walk, not riot or loot or burn

Consistently amazed that people seem to think that as long as you don’t literally say “I am inciting you to commit violence!” it can’t be considered incitement.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#752

Post by jakelazaroff » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 5:48 AM UTC

brigandish wrote: post #734

modriano wrote: post #639

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neither I nor the person I replied to mentioned free speech. They asserted that Google or Apple removing an app will lead to Google or Apple "[taking] everything else from you". I pointed out a class of apps that are banned and asked why we haven't slipped down the slope they described.

> in uncensored, insufficiently moderated communities > if so, why doesn't the prohibition of apps for child pornography Forgive me, I was obviously mistaken to bring up freedom of speech or to claim that you were conflating apps/sites that allow freedom of speech with those that allow child pornography. /s Edit: fixed my egregious typos.

The point is that free speech absolutism requires that child pornography be protected speech.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#753

Post by hndudette2 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 5:59 AM UTC

rrose wrote: post #233

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.

I seriously can't identify with this viewpoint. There's no censorship here- parler still exists, people are still free to share their (abhorrent) viewpoints there, Google is just choosing not to amplify the voices of people that have proven themselves capable of and prone to violence. All the pearl-clutching over free speech is totally overblown.

> choosing not to amplify the voices of people that have proven themselves capable of and prone to violence

Then why not ban Twitter as well? I could show you hundreds of tweets from little known left-wing activists inciting violence during the BLM protests. This double standard tells us that the rationale given for banning Parler is just an excuse. The real reason is that executives in these companies are doing what their most vocal employees and the liberal media are pressuring them to do.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#754

Post by Ancapistani » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 6:01 AM UTC

lenkite wrote: post #509

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can the bans (being de-platformed) be more horrific than the actual violence that's occurred?

Why is violence from one side celebrated and called "peaceful" ?

Violence from both sides is celebrated and called “peaceful” - by one side or the other.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#755

Post by hndudette2 » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 6:06 AM UTC

iujjkfjdkkdkf wrote: post #138

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.

A lot of pedants are telling you it's not censorship and they are technically correct, these private platforms are within their rights to decide how they are used. And many people have raised concerns before about what it means that we've given so much power to these platforms. I hope this goes down as the time the big platforms overplayed their hand and made people realise that even though we have turned over so muc…

> telling you it's not censorship and they are technically correct

No, they are technically incorrect. As other posters have pointed out, it literally is censorship. Whether a private company or government is doing it is irrelevant to the definition of that term.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#756

Post by lambdaphagy » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 6:08 AM UTC

auslegung wrote: post #690

lambdaphagy wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's actually true. Weather Underground, for example, bombed the Capitol in 1971. ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/03/02/a-... ) One of the group's leaders, Bill Ayers, lives unremorsefully in a tony neighborhood in Chicago where he went on to have an influential academic career, dedicating books to political assassins, and mentoring future presidents. This caused a minor kerfluff…

I guess you didn't read my response, I said "Whenever people historically have stormed the capital building, everyone coordinates to ban them from their platforms." Your "rebuttal" lists no one who stormed The Capital Building (sorry should've put that in bigger letters)

Does bombing the Capitol strike you as a qualitatively lesser offense? I say they are both bad. What do you think?

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#757

Post by kortilla » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 6:11 AM UTC

vmception wrote: post #104

kortilla wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overreach is not a government specific term.

okay. I think the nuance is you are missing is that I don't care about private sector using their first amendment right to freedom of association.

I think the nuance you are missing is that people don’t care if you aren’t upset, but they absolutely are. And you should be skeptical of companies that do these things because this is how we end up with segregation, people refusing to bake cakes for gay weddings, etc.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#758

Post by kortilla » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 6:12 AM UTC

danijelb wrote: post #168

kortilla wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course it’s censorship. Censorship has nothing to do with who is doing it. Whether a private company suppresses communication or the government does it, it’s still censorship.

So the government should be able to force your business to do something against your will? That doesn't sound like free market of which USA, and particularly conservatives, are so proud of.

Yes, this is why restaurants must seat black people, no matter how racist the owner.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#759

Post by lambdaphagy » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 6:19 AM UTC

lambdaphagy wrote: post #756

auslegung wrote: post #690

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you didn't read my response, I said "Whenever people historically have stormed the capital building, everyone coordinates to ban them from their platforms." Your "rebuttal" lists no one who stormed The Capital Building (sorry should've put that in bigger letters)

Does bombing the Capitol strike you as a qualitatively lesser offense? I say they are both bad. What do you think?

Or take the 1954 attack on the Capitol, in which Puerto Rican separatists opened fire from a balcony, wounding five members of Congress. That seems to me at least as bad as what happened yesterday.

Did this discredit the cause of Puerto Rican nationalism and drive its supporters from public life? It would appear not: you can still be a celebrity with a successful career while voicing your support and admiration.

I'm not asking you to say that what happened yesterday was good, because of course it wasn't. I'm asking you why you think that such events are so rare and universally condemned. In fact they seem to happen on a timescale of decades at most, probably less, and the public judgment of the perpetrators seems to correlate less with the objective severity of the act as with elite consensus opinion of the cause it promotes.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#760

Post by kortilla » Sat, Jan 09, 2021, 6:20 AM UTC

quickthrowman wrote: post #502

blisterpeanuts wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wherein 100 people spilling over a barrier into a government building (and one of them getting shot to death) is somehow worse than the aforementioned billions in property damage and assaults on cops, smashed police cars, passersby attacked, stores looted, fires set... in 12 different cities around the nation?

For some historical perspective, the last time the Capitol was stormed, British soldiers burned it to the ground. This was 200 years ago. There have been multiple riots over multiple police-involved killings in multiple locations in the last decade. So yes, what they did was far worse. They claimed to be defending the constitution while in fact they were using force to stop a constitutionally-mandated process: certif…

Tone it back a bit. We have lost multiple presidents and other countless politicians to actual assassinations. Breaching the capitol is certainly new but that speaks to the incompetence of the police, not the gravity of the protesters’ intents.

> There were multiple people with zip tie handcuffs in their possession in the Capitol.

Maybe to tie some people up? Guess what the intent is of the people that have bombs and guns.

As Senator Graham pointed out in his speech, the security failure was so catastrophic that it could have been the death of the entire house, the senate, and the Vice President (lots of people with large backpacks inside that could have been loaded with explosives).

If there was any serious attempt at an actual overthrow it would have been a much worse day.