111–120 of 1001 posts
This vicious lethal (effectively kills Parler) action by Amazon - driven by a mob of woke employees - will cause long term damage to AWS. I had plans to use AWS for a potentially huge SAAS business, even though it is not likely to be contentious, just the thought of them being able to destroy everything overnight, without due process, without recourse - sends chills down my spine. I cannot now imagine, being able to…
I don't know which social media platforms use AWS to any critical extent, but I can't imagine them ejecting a big name like Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, etc over "finding dozens of posts on the service which it said encouraged violence".
Ayatollah posts to Instagram... they don’t seem to care much about that.
Parler wasn't some innocent social media site that happened to have some disgusting content on it. The disgusting content was literally its reason for existing, despite all of the bland "we're just a free speech site" stuff. And I have yet to hear anyone discuss how "anything goes" and social media do not mix. It's much easier to turn a community toxic than it is to keep it healthy, and healthy communities (of any so…
[flagged]
Is this, legally, a free speech issue on its own? No, and I support Amazon’s right to “nope” out of anything they want.
But in the current context of the rush to also prevent open Trump support in other areas like payment processing, and the way the media is hellbent on trying to inextricably link Trump support with terrorism, it should be apparent that there’s a larger effort in play here, that feels highly politically motivated.
What bothers me at this point isn’t whether Amazon has the legal right to do this (they do).
What bothers me somewhat is that there is a clear chilling effect that is intended across the board for a huge portion of the country.
What bothers me even more, is that so many intelligent, well intentioned people are practically giddy about it.
We don’t all have to agree politically in any capacity, but I would at least hope we would have enough empathy to judge this in the context in which any reasonable person would see this on the other side, and be willing to advocate, at the very least, that we do this carefully and with respect for our fellow neighbors. Instead, I see absolute celebration about what can very fairly be seen (whether rightly or wrongly) as an attempt to ostracize millions of Americans.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do not understand what you are saying, could you clarify?
Roughly translated, "everyone who isn't on my side is going to be killed by our side, which might upset you, but I would not consider that 'inciting violence'." EDIT: I misunderstood "purge" in this context. I disagree that silence on moderating content is "violence" just as I disagree that anything you disagree with is "violence." But I do not believe content will be "purged" unless it's part of a movement to unseat…
He's saying that when a person don't like something, the recent trend is to just label it as "inciting violence". He then adds onto that by saying the idea of "silence is violence" means that anyone who does not speak out against the disliked thing is inherently guilty of "inciting violence" as well, so lurkers and moderates are not safe from being labeled.
Again, I disagree with what he said. However, accusing his post of threatening violence against everyone with whom he disagrees does kind of support his point.
Parler wasn't some innocent social media site that happened to have some disgusting content on it. The disgusting content was literally its reason for existing, despite all of the bland "we're just a free speech site" stuff. And I have yet to hear anyone discuss how "anything goes" and social media do not mix. It's much easier to turn a community toxic than it is to keep it healthy, and healthy communities (of any so…
[flagged]
So far, Parler and its associates have come a lot closer to dismantling American democracy than Iran ever has. That's why they get taken more seriously. Neither Twitter, nor Apple, nor Amazon want to be responsible for the rise of a fascist regime in the US.
Too often, you can't see the rise of authoritarianism until its too late. This time, we saw it in time. I commend these companies for taking a stand, despite the obvious backlash they'll suffer as a result.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is hyperbolic in the extreme, and to blame "woke employees" with everything going on right now is just plain silly. When deciding whether to choose to host your services with AWS you can answer a simple question: are you planning on violating their terms of service? If the answer is yes, do not use AWS.
I'm just commenting on the decision to evict Parler from AWS, there were several news articles that it was employee driven maybe these reports are wrong, I don't know, the MSM is not exactly a reliable source of facts lately. I also don't see how Parler is responsible for the illegal behaviour of the rioters - surely the poor preparation by the security forces for a well publicised rally is more of a contributing fac…
Any action by a corporation not directed by the board/shareholders is “employee driven", since everyone from the C-Suite down is an employee.
That's not inconsistent with it being based on terms of service violations, who do you think identifies those?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed, and I think it's because Parler is best known for hosting violent, far-right content, that is linked to the recent insurrection at the Capitol Building. Whereas the other services you cite are much more generic in their clientele. So based on this, Amazon made a business decision to deny service to Parler, due to the adverse publicity (and perhaps, potential legal liability) generated for them by hosting this…
What about calling for the eradication of Jews? https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1003332853525110784 Twitter doesn't seem to have any issue with this content
So far, Parler and its associates have come a lot closer to dismantling American democracy than Iran ever has. That's why they get taken more seriously.
As Twitter said, it's not just the content, but the context as well. When Iranian soldiers invade the US Capitol, I'm sure they'll face a Twitter ban as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The NYT lied to the American public to whip them up into supporting the Iraq War, which led to the deaths of millions of people (many of them innocent). Why won't AWS, Google, and Apple collectively ban them? Their open calls for violence were far more consequential and severe and serious than anything on Parler
The actual reason for the war: an informant fed the government bad intel and the state looked the other way because they wanted a reason to invade Iraq. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_(informant)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clean_Break:_A_New_Strateg...
The Bush administration officials who sold those lies to the public were zionist jews who had written this policy paper just 5 years before Bush appointed them into the government.
Parler wasn't some innocent social media site that happened to have some disgusting content on it. The disgusting content was literally its reason for existing, despite all of the bland "we're just a free speech site" stuff. And I have yet to hear anyone discuss how "anything goes" and social media do not mix. It's much easier to turn a community toxic than it is to keep it healthy, and healthy communities (of any so…
[flagged]