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

Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

deadline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 259 posts

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#131

Post by randallsquared »

LatteLazy wrote: post #94
randallsquared wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why wasn't the FBI ready to swoop and arrest actual violent people given they were posting their plans in plane view? I assume because the vast majority of such posts were and are fantasies masquerading as plans, and there aren't the resources to set up stings for each such "plan".

Edit: this is a snarky comment and I should have been polite. I wasn't. I apologise. Original comment: Turns out the resources were just the price of a plane ticket to Washington...

That sure is pithy, but it doesn't make any sense unless you're suggesting that there was only one public plan for what people were going to do on the 6th, right? While I haven't looked for them, I would be very surprised if that was the case.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#132

Post by manfredo »

brayhite wrote: post #115
manfredo wrote: post #96

The way this forum was purged from the internet is making me uncomfortable. I never used Parler, and I really don't care about the fact that it's gone. But the way that a handful of private companies effectively decides who gets to reach an audience and who doesn't is deeply troubling. We're increasingly becoming a world where what is and isn't allowed in the public sphere is controlled by a handful of corporate lead…

I don’t think the goal of banning these folks is to change the banned person’s mind. It’s to slow down the spread of the banned person’s rhetoric. To your suggestion that folks who witness the ban take place suspecting “there’s something afoot”, while that could be right, I’d bet that’s a much smaller number than the number of folks who would’ve otherwise seen the rhetoric and came around to agreeing with it, if not…

I agree that the goal is to curb the spread of such views, not so much to change the minds of those who already harbor them. But I still think it's having the opposite effect. The streisand effect is real and likely playing out here.

Thanks to this ban, a lot of people are wondering if the claims of electoral fraud were actually disproven or if evidence of legitimate fraud was suppressed. The bans make it very easy to appeal to uncertainty: you can't find evidence of fraud not because fraud didn't happen but because the evidence of fraud was purged.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#133

Post by nmjohn »

sto_hristo wrote: post #86
baggachipz wrote: post #10

> "They made an attempt to not only kill the app, but to actually destroy the entire company. And it’s not just these three companies. Every vendor from text message services to email providers to our lawyers all ditched us too on the same day." If everybody else is an asshole, maybe you're the asshole.

Everybody was not an asshole for the two years this existed and suddenly became one a mere week ago. Strange, innit?

Prior to a week ago, there hadn't been an attack against the US Capitol planned on the app while the owners defend the right of the planners to use it for that purpose ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It should be expected that when historically unprecedented things happen, people's viewpoints change.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#134

Post by simonh »

j8hn wrote: post #82
throwaway189262 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ehhh I've looked at parler out of curiosity. Basically full of hate, conspiracy, calls for violence, blatant racism "kill blacks" type stuff. I'm amazed companies were willing to work with them in the first place. Providing services to a company like that is like providing service to the KKK

Is this speech illegal?

Inciting murder is illegal in the USA, here in Britain and in most countries.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#135

Post by chopin24 »

jlos wrote: post #121

I think there are actually two issues here: the incidence of violence and use of a "Content Killswitch". By a content killswitch, I mean that concerted action by 3 companies to basicaly scrub the entire internet of source materia in 24-48 hours and leave only articles giving their spin on the events. I remember the same thing happened when that stupid "Plandemic" movie came out earlier last year. Even while I had no…

Unfortunately, all you have here is a stance. Having a stance is easy: it's not your company that's hosting the material, it's not your work that's being co-opted to facilitate violence, it's not your legal team that has to go to court when the company gets sued. I've got lots of stances on things that will never impact me, too.

Everyone here is saying the same thing, but no one is willing to engage with the very real, actual outcomes of that stance.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#136

Post by skynet-9000 »

skynet-9000 wrote: post #126
grzm wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the hills are on fire, it's not a conspiracy when everyone starts fighting fire to protect their homes. One of the pernicious aspects of conspiracy theories is that, when pressed for evidence or presented with evidence contrary to their beliefs, those arguing for the conspiracy fall back to another level of conspiracy.

Conspiracy is a legal term and used here in a context unrelated to conspiracy theories, but to your point: what if all of the hills start on fire at the same time?

@grzm, sorry can't reply to you. I agree, there can be a strong case to be made that it's just a coincidence and they all moved on the same external event just because they were all meaning to anyway. It also seems like a case could be made that it wasn't a coincidence as well. I doubt we'll ever know, since I don't think Parler will ever take any action in this direction.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#137

Post by mrusme »

Parler is broken by design and it was predictable that it would get to this point, one way or another.

The platform would have had to be designed as decentralised system in first place, since (especially for things like this) it's the only way to survive in the long run.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#138

Post by FlyMoreRockets »

Fjolsvith wrote: post #55
dontblink wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. The time has passed when it crossed into violence. We should do here what the Germans did to Nazi groups after the war. Ban them.

You are kinda overlooking the fact that we haven't had the war yet.

If we use the wisdom history provides, we don't need to have the war.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#139

Post by LatteLazy »

pfisch wrote: post #123
LatteLazy wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The great irony here is Parler DOES engage in loads of censorship (no parody, no Pro-Cannabis comments, no positive antifa comments, I don't think you can even be left wing on there). So I'm stuck defending a censorous site against censorship!? I am a weirdo, because a public site like Parler is exactly where I hope insurrection should be planned. Why wasn't the FBI ready to swoop and arrest actual violent people giv…

When they stopped filming people streaking on sports fields it stopped happening. When school shooters get tons of media coverage school shootings go up. Same with suicides. People don't like to think that censorship works, but the truth is that censorship does work a lot of the time.

I can see some argument for that. But It still makes no sense to ban parler. And you now need to filter the content of all media to prevent those people getting publicity elsewhere.

So is that the plan? Keep parler but install censors there AND in every website mod office, newspaper, TV station and radio studio?

That's a lot of work. When we could just put FBI agents on parler and have them prevent crimes with conspiracy charges.

And you still can't actually justify a ban on parler.

Re: Parler CEO Says Service Dropped by “Every Vendor” and Could End His Business

#140

Post by j8hn »

trianglem wrote: post #30
influx wrote: post #26

How far should this go? Should banks refuse to service employees? Grocery stores? Gas stations? They are private businesses, they have no reason to tolerate people who are thinking the wrong way.

Yes fascists should be refused by everyone. It’s in everyone’s interests to have more customers so this works itself out through game theory.

Who decides who are the fascists?

A community activist in Seattle is organizing against Antifa calling them terrorists for causing violence and hijacking social justice issues such as Black Lives Matter and the homeless issue.

Should that group also be refused by everyone, or does it depend on political ideology?

Source:

https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1345184414016278528

https://twitter.com/choeshow/status/1345192831602679809

Post reply on HN