81–90 of 91 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
we voted against ‘liberal’ version of fascism. Unfortunately fascism won.
Words still have specific, falsifiable definitions.
shutting down free speech is one of the hallmarks of fascism, and it happens before your very eyes.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government doesn’t need to do it, since it has been replaced on a lot of matter by corporations. Never in history companies held that much power on people’s life. Arguing for deplatforming because "muh private" is missing the fact democracy emerged to limit the most powerful entity at the time (government). Now that companies are the most powerful element of society, their power needs to be limited as well.
They're not the most powerful. They're just the most popular. There is a difference. They have ZERO control over your life. I know because I don't use any of them and I live just fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's also what I thought. Instead of using fire extinguishers, FB/Apple/Google are adding more gasoline to the fire. This is going to radicalize people (especially conspiracy theorists) who now think have actual, indisputable "proof" these companies are there to get them.
This is my main worry. I’m not worried about Parler getting taken down, they have no intrinsic right to have access to these stores hosted by private entities. They can self host, or find someone willing to host them, or implement moderation so they don’t have people calling for the death of senators on their service. But I am worried this will light a fuse towards further radicalization.
What I see happening is Pillarisation [1].
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter was and is used to coordinate illegal behaviour, the riots of last summer are a good example. When will Google and Apple ban Twitter? They won't. The question is why Twitter is allowed on these platforms but not Parler or Gab or whatever other Twitter-competitor.
Twitter moderates user content. They have suspended or banned a large number of accounts for calling for violence, or even for wishing ill upon people (e.g., a lot of people got suspended for Tweeting when Trump got COVID that they hoped he would die from it). Parler does not. There are numerous accounts on Parler calling for the killing of Pelosi, Biden, Pence, Chief Justice Roberts, assorted judges that ruled again…
The mentioned platforms also moderate user content, they just have different guidelines. Both claim to follow the law in that they take down content which violates it. Both claim that only illegal content is taken down. That is, as far as I can see, in line with the expectations for a platform to be considered a "common carrier" and as such be freed from liability for its users' content. Platforms which go beyond this by moderating on different grounds run the risk of being considered publishers and as such to be held responsible for their users' content. If Apple and Google put further demands on those platforms the question becomes who eventually is responsible for user content, this might end up being Apple and Google. That, in turn, should make developers think twice whether they benefit from being on those platforms. The alternative is to deploy to the web without any "native" apps (which often are not much more than rehashed web apps to begin with) which opens their product to a wider user base without needing to bend to the will of third parties.
This would be a good thing in my opinion. The time for "native" apps has come and gone, the time for the web has been there for a long time but this might just be the push needed to convince developers to make it their prime focus. This goes especially for communications-focused products since those derive their usefulness from being connected to the 'net anyway. There is still a place for native apps - offline mapping, offline media players, hardware-interfacing apps like Wifi-scanners, step counters etc - but those tend not to be the ones which end up in hot water anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Words still have specific, falsifiable definitions.
agreed, but somehow the left stick 'racist' and 'fascist' labels on the back of everyone who disagrees with their ideology. shutting down free speech is one of the hallmarks of fascism, and it happens before your very eyes.
There is no argument for censorship, suspension or banning, based on our 1st amendment—- on any of the multiple platforms doing so. I came on here just to check what the “young intellectual tech” community thinks— I consider myself part of it. I’m a 20-something female, born in the heart of Silicon Valley, and have been heavily involved in tech during my short career. Heads up: This isn’t animal farm, this is 1984! I…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Twitter moderates user content. They have suspended or banned a large number of accounts for calling for violence, or even for wishing ill upon people (e.g., a lot of people got suspended for Tweeting when Trump got COVID that they hoped he would die from it). Parler does not. There are numerous accounts on Parler calling for the killing of Pelosi, Biden, Pence, Chief Justice Roberts, assorted judges that ruled again…
There is a plethora of similar content to be found on Twitter so that is not the reason. The mentioned platforms also moderate user content, they just have different guidelines. Both claim to follow the law in that they take down content which violates it. Both claim that only illegal content is taken down. That is, as far as I can see, in line with the expectations for a platform to be considered a "common carrier"…
Twitter's content policy explicitly bans several things that are not illegal [1] [2] [3].
[1] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/hateful-condu...
[2] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/glorification...
[3] https://help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-policies/medical-misin...
Coordinated bans everywhere. Build your own platform they said. They'll just instruct them to download the APK on their phones instead, just like Epic games did for Fortnite. Even so, I think it will only get worse. They'll also move to encrypted chat apps instead. So when will Signal and Telegram be targeted and banned from the App Store or Google Play Store?
>They'll just instruct them to download the APK on their phones... I mean, they could always just open their phone's browser and go to parler.com. Apps might be gone but it's not like they're unreachable.
Or should they ask Siri and look it up on safari?
Regardless, the same could be said for Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Amazon, Gmail, and countless other apps.
But nobody would be cause that's just being facetious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So to be clear: Facebook allowed Trump to win in 2016 but them censoring him in 2020 isn't a concerning form of censorship? I think we're past the point were we have to admit social media and the tech monopolies aren't just websites anymore.
The context is 2021 and after treason.