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

Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#531

Post by pixl97 »

nix23 wrote: post #505
Johnny555 wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was the parler content legal? "Amazon Web Services suspended Parler from its web hosting services... citing a letter it had obtained that mentions 98 examples of Parler posts that "encourage and incite violence." Don't forget that Amazon also has legal liability for hosting and distributing illegal content. Amazon is not a monopoly -- the mitigation for AWS being able to cut off your business is to architect your app…

>98 examples of Parler posts that "encourage and incite violence." Just imagine how much that would be in Facebook numbers? I think we can block Facebook too, no?

Facebook runs on AWS? No they have their own infra.

Lesson of the day, if you're doing shady shit, own your own servers and stay off mine.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#532

Post by asdfasgasdgasdg »

jlkuester7 wrote: post #469
cactus2093 wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What are the best mitigations here, both technical and social? Vocally side with the popular issues, or try to stay completely out of them, to try to avoid becoming a target (e.g., social media presence)? For now, don't attempt to overturn a fair democratic election and install an illegitimate government. Seems like a pretty easy thing to stay clear of. I get the concern you're expressing, but not everything is a s…

> not everything is a slippery slope From a risk management perspective, this does not seem like a safe assumption to make. The DailyStormer got "canceled" by vendors for not even trying to moderate content that actively promoted violence (among other horrible things). Now Parlor gets "canceled" by vendors for not doing a good enough job trying to moderate content promoting violence. The bar for getting "canceled" is…

> From a risk management perspective, this does not seem like a safe assumption to make. The DailyStormer got "canceled" by vendors for not even trying to moderate content that actively promoted violence (among other horrible things). Now Parlor gets "canceled" by vendors for not doing a good enough job trying to moderate content promoting violence.

If you do a sufficiently poor job, you might as well not even be trying at all. Especially if you court the content as a growth strategy.

Everyone's free to manage their risks however they please, but I personally have no less confidence in AWS than I had before this event. I have updated my understanding of their decision heuristic as it applies to kicking people off their service. But the probability of me or any company I'd manage running afoul of it is far less than the chance of getting struck by lightning.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#533

Post by wolco5 »

yongjik wrote: post #488
chmod600 wrote: post #425

This is a weird case of private companies getting together and voluntarily enforcing the supremecy of the state. I'm sure it's happened before, but probably not in situations we'd like to emulate. Insurrection is bad, but the possibility of insurrection is good. When any possibility of insurrection is crushed, for everyone now and in the future (not just insurrectionists), that sounds like it won't end well for the p…

It's amusing that people are simultaneously complaining that tech companies are censoring the president of the US and "enforcing the supremacy of the state" at the same time. True "deep state" conspiracy material. After four years of running the country, they are still underdogs.

It's too out in the open to call it a conspiracy. Amazon,Google, Amazon and Apple (twitter, facebook) are putting out press releases that say this is what they are doing.

They are enforcing the supremacy of the state for the next government. If he was going back as president these companies would not be making these press releases.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#534

Post by sn_master »

Johnny555 wrote: post #519
sn_master wrote: post #491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"legal" in a democracy is something that only a court can decide. I don't know what was Parler's size, but in any website with millions of visitors a handful will post aweful things each day. Were those 98 posts posted by the same user? Did anyone report them and Parler refused to take them down? Were they popular or downvoted with few views?

So if someone posts a plot to kill lawmakers, take over the government all while using their website to organize the insurrection, you're saying that they can't be held to ToS terms banning illegal content until a court has ruled on whether or not their insurrection is illegal? I haven't seen the examples that AWS provided to Parler, but I trust that AWS lawyers signed off on the plan so they show a lack of moderatio…

When there was a plot against the Michigan governor, without a single step of the plot going into action everyone was arrested and convicted and no one from either party complained about that, after being shown the evidence.

If Parler or someone on Parler is doing something wrong, arrest and convict them using the law.

AWS lawyers can sign-off anything because the Terms and Conditions are skewed entirely in AWS favor, let alone the new king in town.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#535

Post by [deleted] »

staunch wrote: post #486
munificent wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hear a lot of people saying this is just another example of the left trying to shut down free speech This is a specious argument on its face. The First Amendment does not say that private companies are obligated to spend money broadcasting someone else's speech. Hosting and serving isn't free and any private company has the freedom to decide what not to host. If an author's content is so toxic that advertisers wo…

Every private company in the U.S. is compelled by law to offer goods and services regardless of race, religion, etc. Adding political affiliation to the list of protected classes probably makes sense. It seems odd that it's not on the list, doesn't it? The bans we're seeing here are very clearly political. Parler is not breaking laws. It seems obvious that if Parler was being used by BLM to organize violent riots the…

[deleted]

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#536

Post by jlkuester7 »

lokar wrote: post #513
jlkuester7 wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not everything is a slippery slope From a risk management perspective, this does not seem like a safe assumption to make. The DailyStormer got "canceled" by vendors for not even trying to moderate content that actively promoted violence (among other horrible things). Now Parlor gets "canceled" by vendors for not doing a good enough job trying to moderate content promoting violence. The bar for getting "canceled" is…

Parlor did not have a real, honest, effort at moderation. It was done poorly, and seems to have been just a fig leaf to say they were doing it. Objectively it was not working. Way way way worse than anything on FB or Twitter.

It seems likely that this is true. But couldn't you get to the same end-result by having good intentions but a bad moderation system? (e.g. I want to keep Nazi content off my service so I subject all posts to a review by 5 other users. That might work until you get a bunch of Nazis that suddenly sign up up-vote each other's content).

Not every new service can afford to moderate things like "FB or Twitter". And this is an important risk to account for.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#537

Post by Blahah »

sn_master wrote: post #496
MartinCron wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parler chose to use AWS for their hosting. When you build your company on someone else's platform, you're explicitly giving them that market power.

They needed 300-500 servers according to the CEO. There isn't much choice in the market when it comes to that kind of need, specially when you need to be hosted in the US because you're a political website. Imagine if they were hosted in Russia instead, they would have lost all their credibility.

Of course there is! There are at least hundreds of hosting companies that can provide that as a service, and of course they can just buy their own servers. Nobody is obliged to make it easy for them to run their site.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#538

Post by EpicEng »

bArray wrote: post #351
EpicEng wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErTzgBxXcAAuTkC?format=jpg&name=... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErTzgBuXYAAB4y2?format=jpg&name=... https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErTzgB3XIAcffGC?format=jpg&name=... https://i.redd.it/q2151lxlfpa61.jpg These were not taken down

For the first link, there was just one upvote in 23 hours. For the second link, there was 6 up and 3 down votes in 2 days. The third link has all information removed, to the point it can't be verified. The fourth link had four upvotes probably in 1 day or more. There's no doubt the material is objectionable, but it was only up for a short time and got very little reach, even getting negative reactions within their ow…

>For the first link, there was just one upvote in 23 hours. For the second link, there was 6 up and 3 down votes in 2 days. The third link has all information removed, to the point it can't be verified. The fourth link had four upvotes probably in 1 day or more.

I don't see how upvotes or views are relevant.

>There's no doubt the material is objectionable, but it was only up for a short time and got very little reach, even getting negative reactions within their own circles. And bare in mind, these aren't exactly random examples either - this is supposed to represent the very worst - and it's just some random people with little reach who get negative reactions from their own followers.

It's only supposed to represent the 15 seconds of work I performed in going through the dump of parler data. There's plenty more if you're interested. Again, whether or not it reached a lot of people is hardly relevant.

>Meanwhile over on Twitter you've got people sharing a picture of Trump's severed head, you've got "Hang Mike Pence" trending as a hash tag, you have people celebrating the death of the lady who got shot in the capital, etc.

And that shouldn't be allowed either. What's your point?

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#539

Post by imaginenore »

Johnny555 wrote: post #413
Closi wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agree - but I think this can only be solved via legislation. Amazon has too much market power if it can shut down another company at the push of a button for something that isn't illegal (even if it's distasteful).

Was the parler content legal? "Amazon Web Services suspended Parler from its web hosting services... citing a letter it had obtained that mentions 98 examples of Parler posts that "encourage and incite violence." Don't forget that Amazon also has legal liability for hosting and distributing illegal content. Amazon is not a monopoly -- the mitigation for AWS being able to cut off your business is to architect your app…

I can easily find 98 examples of inciting violence on Twitter or Facebook. Does it mean Google will delete their apps, Amazon will drop them from the servers? Of course not.

Because it has nothing to do with some users calling for violence.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#540

Post by jlkuester7 »

yks wrote: post #521
jlkuester7 wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> not everything is a slippery slope From a risk management perspective, this does not seem like a safe assumption to make. The DailyStormer got "canceled" by vendors for not even trying to moderate content that actively promoted violence (among other horrible things). Now Parlor gets "canceled" by vendors for not doing a good enough job trying to moderate content promoting violence. The bar for getting "canceled" is…

I think things are pretty clear cut, if you want to start a service to obviously harbor fascist user-driven content, then yes, prepare to be cut off from the mainstream vendors. DailyStormer and Parler are explicitly those types of services. It is a bit disingenuous to suggest that because Parler is down, "mom and pop" websites with comment section attached now need to lawyer up.

> It is a bit disingenuous to suggest that because Parler is down, "mom and pop" websites with comment section attached now need to lawyer up.

This is definitely a straw-man, but at the same time, if your website hosts user-supplied content and you don't have a rock-solid strategy for moderating it, then yeah you probably should be worried. (Though the spammers will probably take down your site long before AWS...)

Post reply on HN