171–180 of 259 posts
And even if Parler is successfully killed off today, its successors will certainly learn from the mistake of trusting the FAGMAN group of companies.
By overreacting to the symptoms instead of dismantling the underlying causes, cancel culture merely immunises the extremes against censorship.
> "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?
You can make the argument that it sucks that so much infrastructure is built upon orgs that have their own first amendment rights and I’d agree with that, but just that, no one is forced to associate with you. If a group of companies are refusing your cash, might want to reevaluate your viewpoints respective to the broader community.
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…
I think this is something a lot of us older people forget: if you experienced the internet back when there were thousands of hosting companies and people ran their own servers for everything, this seems weird since there was always another place for anyone substantially less odious than stormfr*nt. After the 2010s, though, an awful lot of people got out of that way of thinking and there are now entire businesses which only have Facebook/Instagram/Twitter/YouTube accounts. I find these “victims” detestable but it definitely doesn’t make me happy that Facebook, Google, and Apple have a huge degree of control over what the average internet user sees even if there are tons of sites which they don’t control.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
That's user actions (admin results in "dead"), though HN may be tuned more sensitively, particularly for a highly-active green (new) account. Prior history may be associated. Recent days (and months) have been fraught.
There's a contact email in the FAQ. You can request action, though that doesn't seem overly justified here. Guidelines are also worth aa review.
Discussing voting is strongly discouraged.
Emotion runs high on political threads. It's useful to carefully consider what you write, how much evidence you present, plausible alternatives, and tone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 don't think that's the goal. I think the goal for those companies is to not lose business over this. This is the free market at its best. Market pressure has made the math pretty simple: if N customers won't do business with my company because we do business with Abhorrent Co and the potential revenue loss from losing those N companies is greater than the revenue I generate from Abhorrent Co, then drop Abhorrent Co…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 conspi…
Note that the alternative would be forcing private companies to do business with a party they do not want to do business with. That has its own set of issues.
This is the price we pay for an open society. Freedom means freedom for morons as well as for us. I wish there were an easier answer, but I wouldn't even trust myself with the power to decide who is allowed to speak and who isn't, so I won't trust Amazon Web Services PR department. So no one gets the job and sometimes that stinks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
nice try blaming the lefties
Please don't post unsubstantive or flamebait comments to HN, and please don't use this site for ideological battle. We ban accounts that do those things, regardless of which ideology they're for or against. The idea here is thoughtful conversation on topics of intellectual curiosity. Please stick to that. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I can't see the post you're replying to but the post it's replying to is insinuating that half the US electorate is seditious. Propagandized beyond belief. It's almost funny.
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…
If sedition and insurrection are being planned, advocated, and organised on your site and you continuously claim it's no big deal, you might find yourself with legal and national security concerns and pressures, and not merely business partner TOU/AUP prroblems.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about we attempt to understand why people are thinking this way. Why are they not interested in thinking your way? What can be done to help both side talk and solve problems together?
I think you should go to one of these forums - parler or gab, currently /r/conspiracy, or one of the similar. Try to have a reasoned conversation with them. I really genuinely want more people to do that. Because when you do that you very quickly start to understand there is no reason. On the 5th of January, you would've heard them loudly preach that the 6th will be the "reckoning" the "true patriots" would "rise up"…
You'll be banned pretty quickly, they really don't care about free speech, only their speech.