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

Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 640 posts

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#411

Post by imtringued »

enriquto wrote: post #392
a012 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the proof to why I strip all metadata AND filename (esp. photos from camera include timestamp in filename) before uploading it to share one social medias.

Camera vendors are perfectly capable of storing a lot of metadata in the jpeg encoded image itself, in an steganographic way. If you want to really be sure, crop your image to a position that is not multiple of 8 on any direction, then scale it by a factor very close to 1, add some noise, and re-compress it again. Some steganography is yet robust to that, but only the really fancy stuff. Anyhow, if your image shows r…

The problem with that idea is that there would have to be a stenography standard and then it becomes easy to defeat.

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#412

Post by [deleted] »

enriquto wrote: post #392
a012 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the proof to why I strip all metadata AND filename (esp. photos from camera include timestamp in filename) before uploading it to share one social medias.

Camera vendors are perfectly capable of storing a lot of metadata in the jpeg encoded image itself, in an steganographic way. If you want to really be sure, crop your image to a position that is not multiple of 8 on any direction, then scale it by a factor very close to 1, add some noise, and re-compress it again. Some steganography is yet robust to that, but only the really fancy stuff. Anyhow, if your image shows r…

[deleted]

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#413

Post by deadbunny »

rendall wrote: post #343
kennywinker wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can express opinions all you want, but you’re going to have to do a lot of work in order to justify compelling someone to do business with you after you say something they don’t like. Like, amazon isn’t actually the basic infrastructure of the internet. You can build web sites and apps without involving them. So why would a law force them to do business with you?

I didn't say anything about "forcing Amazon to do business" with me. If that's your solution, it's a non-starter. I don't have a solution, but Amazon + Apple + Google coordinating to shut down a platform for communication - even a platform that contains expression that I strongly disagree with, I might add - is a problem that requires a solution This is what I wish more people understood now rather than later, but at…

Personally I'm fine with Google and Amazon doing this. AWS isnt the only web host and you can sideload apps on Android.

Apple on the other hand is a lot more murky due to their lockdown of app installs. I don't believe they should be made to host things they don't agree with but people should not be prevented form installing whatever software they want on their own hardware.

For the record I am a staunch free speech advocate but fully believe that no-one (no-company either) owes you (the royal you) a place to use your free speech on their property.

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#414

Post by leoedin »

INTPenis wrote: post #365
berkes wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and notify you about it hours later if you decided to create usage alerts and bill you at the end of the month. This is the crucial part: AWS will serve whatever is request. It brings them money.

Sorry for OT but what about a simple small time private AWS user like me who uses it for static hosting my blog and stuff. Does that mean someone could request a lot of files, over and over, to increase my bill? Or is that served by some cache? Let's say for example I host Mastodon media on S3, about 30G of unique data. Could someone use that to increase the cost of my bill? I do of course have a budget alert set but…

AWS can really sting you. I've completely stopped using it for private projects after receiving a $100 bill for something I accidentally provisioned through the command line.

Not only is it very easy to spend real money by accident, the web interface makes it incredibly hard to work out what you're spending money on (it took me a long time to even understand what I was paying for, and then longer still to turn it all off).

Even if you know what you're getting in to, the pricing is very misleading. A few cents an hour adds up if its running 24/7, and its never obvious whether you're in the free tier or not.

If you don't have deep pockets, be very careful with AWS.

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#415

Post by mlazos »

rendall wrote: post #359
kennywinker wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you come up with a good solution, let us know. Until then, I’m happy to support antitrust action against apple/google/amazon/facebook - but for more pressing reasons than the deplatforming of fascists attempting to overthrow a fair and free election.

> more pressing reasons than the deplatforming of fascists Hint: it's the identical problem to deplatforming BLM or Antifa or Occupy or the Proud Boys or pick anyone you agree with that annoys powerful people. "Having the better politics" will not protect you. "Oh they're just fascists" will not protect your peoples.

Except you need to replace “annoys powerful people” with “storms the seat of our government with intent to overthrow a democratic election result” I’m fine with that being the line for companies to ban a political entity. Amazon and google aren’t randomly banning BLM for protesting in cities.

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#416

Post by jackweirdy »

adwww wrote: post #400
j2bax wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe the person that pulled it down is a digital archivist. I’m sure she has plenty of storage laying around for such occasions.

Presumably just another s3 bucket? Do all your transferring from an EC2 instance in the same region and it never needs to waste bandwidth going over the public internet anyway.

Or local storage. The DataHoarder subreddit where a lot of similar efforts are coordinated has a lot of info about building dense home storage on the cheap

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#417

Post by vfclists »

Codazoa wrote: post #358
wang_li wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free speech is a cultural value and a philosophy it, can apply to anyone and everyone. The first amendment of the US constitution protects the people from politicians and bureaucrats. Just because it’s done by a private party doesn’t mean it’s not censorship. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4t6zNZ-b0A

So does that mean if I am hosting a dinner at my home on my own private property and someone starts spewing hate at people I have to let him because it's his free speech? No, I'm kicking that asshole off my property and banning him from returning. It's the same for these tech companies. They are private companies and if you break their ToS for inciting violence or posting illegal shit then they have the right to ban…

Your home is not infrastructure. Internet service, banking and online payments are infrastructure just like water, gas and electricity and companies shouldn't have the right to cut you off on ideological grounds or because your spew out so called hate speech.

Note I said internet service not a subscription to a social media service. Your internet provider may decline to provide you with email, hell the may even decline you to provide with you with DNS, but they sure as well can't refuse to route your packets or accept incoming connections.

Apple and Google were within their rights to cut off access to the App store, but Amazon were in the wrong because they are an infrastructure company. At the very least they were obliged to allow Parler enough time to transfer to new providers.

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#418

Post by claudiawerner »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #163
mc32 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutist free speech is the _ideal_, but we don't live in an ideal world. There are bad people. That said, unilateral one-sided censorship is not okay. It's like Red Scare Hollywood. My point a few rungs up was that there are many other forms of expression that are notoriously violent and misogynistic but don't get flagged by these same companies. I'm not saying I want that but I'm pointing out insistencies. Doxxin…

Free speech absolutism as an ideal doesn't make sense. The whole reason the notion of free speech exists is that people should be able to say things that other people don't like. Saying that we'd be able to have free speech absolutism if only people didn't say or do X is just "X is unacceptable speech" in disguise. If you exclude "bad" speech, freedom of speech is easy! This thread originated with a comment saying it…

While what you're saying is completely true, and I've been trying to get this point accross online many times, it is still concerning to me that the same philosophical literature that argues for hate speech to be limited also suggest that porn should be too. There are also arguments that there shouldn't be a constitutional right to freedom of speech at all. If these arguments are convincing, the only line of defense against them is the argument that the state (and/or the population in general) cannot be trusted to make any further restrictions - and I think that's a good argument. Similarly, in countries where speech is more limited, we can point out problems of those limitations; I think it is not a fallacy to suggest there is a slippery slope - especially in the case of governments that serve capital, be they conservative or liberal.

I'm very skeptical of the benefits of free speech. I don't think the arguments along the lines of free speech promoting truth or being beneficial to political discourse or allowing 'bad ideas' in the open to be 'disinfected' with debate are valid. But I'm even more skeptical of the state, and I do not trust it to use evidence-based methodologies. I've completely lost all faith in the whole political spectrum, particularly the left-anarchists who promote governmental and corporate censorship.

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#419

Post by enriquto »

imtringued wrote: post #411
enriquto wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Camera vendors are perfectly capable of storing a lot of metadata in the jpeg encoded image itself, in an steganographic way. If you want to really be sure, crop your image to a position that is not multiple of 8 on any direction, then scale it by a factor very close to 1, add some noise, and re-compress it again. Some steganography is yet robust to that, but only the really fancy stuff. Anyhow, if your image shows r…

The problem with that idea is that there would have to be a stenography standard and then it becomes easy to defeat.

Of course, the idea is to keep it secret; a "stenographic standard" seems absurd. If they are embedding this information, it will not be readily detectable by most people.

Re: Pirate Bay founder thinks Parler’s inability to stay online is 'embarrassing'

#420

Post by vfclists »

ggggtez wrote: post #69
idrios wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tbf, I don't think Parler ever saw itself as extremist. Obviously it was used by extremists, but as I've seen mentioned in other threads lately: When you create an alternative platform from the mainstream, the people who join it are either idealists, or are the people who were banned from the mainstream platforms. And if you don't have the resources to moderate those extremists (or foolishly choose not to), the extre…

The CEO literally was personally banning anyone who posted anything left-wing, and yet claims that he's for "free speech". It's laughable. If he wasn't cynically cashing in, then he's not a very deep thinker either. https://www.forbes.com/sites/abrambrown/2020/06/27/parlers-f... They literally welcomed pro-saudi comment farms to their service as well: “The nationalist movement of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has made…

Twitter is also the service of choice of US Presidents who order drone strikes against innocents abroad.
Post reply on HN