I can't think of a more effective way to spark a civil war than threatening to take people's children from them.
I can: Actually doing it, and selling them. Claiming they are not human, they deserve it, they are property, they are unequal, they are unworthy of compassion, then outlawing people's liberty to prevent it. And do it based on skin pigment.
I'm not sure why this comment is relevant. No one in the US (or the West more generally) is doing that or planning on doing it.
I don't know why but what's happening to Parler doesn't feel right at all...
While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Something something free market.
> While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that.
Yeah most of these services are doing that to avoid being associated with Parler and these Trump movements. But it has an anti-democratic feel to it.
AWS gives 5Gbps connectivity to instances, according to https://docs.aws.amazon.com/whitepapers/latest/ec2-networkin... So, if the sum total of Parler was 70 Terabytes, as claimed... the transfer time would be 38 hours, if it was hosted on one instance... but it obviously wasn't. It was more likely only a matter of minutes. This shows a new type of cloud hosting vulnerability. Your entire corporations infrastructure…
> This shows a new type of cloud hosting vulnerability. Your entire corporations infrastructure could be mirrored faster than you could notice. and YOU are paying for the bandwidth too :-)
Upload into many clouds is free. You could set up a bunch of instances on Azure to download data to a data store and shutdown when finished, unless I’m missing something.
In the midst of all this, one thing always bite any site when some break-up happens:
>Also, a lot of posts were deleted by Parler members after the riots on the 6th. Turned out... Parler didn't actually delete anything.. just set a bit as deleted.
The perils of soft/logical delete instead of hard/real deletion.
I can: Actually doing it, and selling them. Claiming they are not human, they deserve it, they are property, they are unequal, they are unworthy of compassion, then outlawing people's liberty to prevent it. And do it based on skin pigment.
I'm not sure why this comment is relevant. No one in the US (or the West more generally) is doing that or planning on doing it.
I though that's what folks on Parlor were doing but I couldn't download the app to see for myself ;-). My comment was an atttempt to highlight to the huge gap between threatening rhetoric and moral atrocities in sparking natonwide infighting.
"Twilio put out at midnight last night. In that Press Release, Twilio accidentally revealed which services Parler was using. Turns out it was all of the security authentications that were used to register a user. This allowed anyone to create a user, and not have to verify an email address, and immediately have a logged-on account. Well, because of that access, it gave them access to the behind the login box API that…
I have no idea about what twilio did, as this is all completely unrelated to any work I've ever done, so that leads me to wonder about contingencies like this in general.
From the perspective of any company using a service like twilio (i.e., not just Parler and this specific set of events), would there not be some sort of failsafe in case something just like this were to happen? Or would this kind of thing be so nearly inconceivable that you wouldn't protect against it?
"Twilio put out at midnight last night. In that Press Release, Twilio accidentally revealed which services Parler was using. Turns out it was all of the security authentications that were used to register a user. This allowed anyone to create a user, and not have to verify an email address, and immediately have a logged-on account. Well, because of that access, it gave them access to the behind the login box API that…
I have no idea about what twilio did, as this is all completely unrelated to any work I've ever done, so that leads me to wonder about contingencies like this in general. From the perspective of any company using a service like twilio (i.e., not just Parler and this specific set of events), would there not be some sort of failsafe in case something just like this were to happen? Or would this kind of thing be so near…
There's two ways to react if an API you're using for authentication type stuff is down:
* Fail and essentially have downtime on the features using the API
* Succeed and essentially have no authentication for that time but no downtime
Parler took the second approach. Platforms that value security would take the first approach.
While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Something something free market.
> While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Yeah most of these services are doing that to avoid being associated with Parler and these Trump movements. But it…
Yep, there are no good choices here. Parler is an organizing venue for Trump supporters attempting to overturn a democratic election and/or storm the capitol, which also has a rather anti-democratic feel to it, no? So you can think of it as a trolley problem with "democracy" strapped to both sets of tracks. Since democracy will be a casualty, to one extent or another, in both the "do nothing" and "do something" options, the service providers must ask themselves: which scenario will hurt democracy worse?
While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Something something free market.
> While it does feel reactionary (if that's the right word) that the services are only now revoking doing business with Parler, they are within their rights to stop the contract one-sidedly. I'm actually fairly sure that in the contract they don't even have to state a reason, but don't quote me on that. Yeah most of these services are doing that to avoid being associated with Parler and these Trump movements. But it…
You think that, democratically speaking, the majority of Americans are in favor of Parler conducting business? You think there should have been a vote or something?
Amazon, Apple, etc don't work democratically though so it doesn't matter.