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

611–620 of 640 posts

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

#611

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

jonathanstrange wrote: post #609
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is quite literally what I said though.

No, you suggested that the harm caused in the production is a reason for criminalizing possession, which is what I disagree with. I accept other reasons in this case, but not this one. Which of these positions you endorse has far-reaching consequences for the moral and legal evaluation. It's similar with the "war on drugs" or when you want to evaluate the morality of your sneakers and clothes. Should possession of th…

Where did I ever imply anything should be criminalized or not?

My point is: There's a clear distinction between material that inherently causes harm in its creation and content that may lead to harm in some way.

Your extension to drugs or clothing only partially makes sense, as those can be produced without causing harm to or exploiting anybody. I view it as more similar to (knowingly) buying stolen goods.

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

#612

Post by lionkor »

Shared404 wrote: post #590
lionkor wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

free speech is a human right, but it's limited (in the declaration of human rights, maybe read it?!) to things that dont hurt public peace, that dont negatively impact someone else's rights, etc.

To be clear, I am not defending Parler, at all . I was actually condemning them for not even living up to the standards they claim to profess, in addition to their other issues.

I got that now, I misunderstood you, apologies. I was just really excited to share this knowledge!

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

#613

Post by permo-w »

>As one of the original co-founders of The Pirate Bay, Peter Sunde Kolmisoppi knows a little something about keeping controversial services online. Kolmisoppi and his colleagues spent decades battling a global coalition of corporations, governments, and law enforcement agencies intent on wiping the file sharing website from the face of the internet. Unsuccessfully.

This implies that he was unsuccessful. As we all know, he was not

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

#614

Post by compsciphd »

imvictor wrote: post #608
compsciphd wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

except you can only upload 750GB a day without somewhat workarounds

You can. Create multiple service accounts, add them to the Shared drives and connect the service accounts using Rclone, a CLI tool that allows you to perform I/O operations on multiple cloud storage. Once a service account reached the limit, switch to another.

"without somewhat workarounds" sometimes I wonder about people.

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

#615

Post by Shared404 »

lionkor wrote: post #612
Shared404 wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear, I am not defending Parler, at all . I was actually condemning them for not even living up to the standards they claim to profess, in addition to their other issues.

I got that now, I misunderstood you, apologies. I was just really excited to share this knowledge!

Fair enough, it's a pretty cool, not very well known piece of info!

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

#616

Post by jonathanstrange »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #611
jonathanstrange wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you suggested that the harm caused in the production is a reason for criminalizing possession, which is what I disagree with. I accept other reasons in this case, but not this one. Which of these positions you endorse has far-reaching consequences for the moral and legal evaluation. It's similar with the "war on drugs" or when you want to evaluate the morality of your sneakers and clothes. Should possession of th…

Where did I ever imply anything should be criminalized or not? My point is: There's a clear distinction between material that inherently causes harm in its creation and content that may lead to harm in some way. Your extension to drugs or clothing only partially makes sense, as those can be produced without causing harm to or exploiting anybody. I view it as more similar to (knowingly) buying stolen goods.

I see your point now. That makes sense to me. Thanks for taking the patience to explain your view in detail!

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

#617

Post by CRConrad »

kennywinker wrote: post #568
PeterStuer wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Essential Utilities are governed in many places by Universal Service Directives ensuring private companies can not willy nilly choose to deny them as they see fit for commercial or other reasons.

I am familiar with that concept. Good luck arguing that aws, google play, or the app store is an essential utility.

Not all that far from it, though, are they?

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

#618

Post by AnthonyMouse »

armada651 wrote: post #610
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I know the US has the biggest prison population in the world, but you can't keep these people in prison for life. I think murdering a police officer is a capital offense. You don't get back out of jail after that one. But even for the people committing less violence than that, and who in turn eventually get released, they only stay released if they stay non-violent. Otherwise they're right back to jail. > I hate to…

> But even for the people committing less violence than that, and who in turn eventually get released, they only stay released if they stay non-violent. Otherwise they're right back to jail. I am of the opinion that we should prevent violent insurrection rather than waiting for it to happen and then responding with jail time. > So now we're abandoning even the premise of free speech? Where did I say that? I'm not say…

> I am of the opinion that we should prevent violent insurrection rather than waiting for it to happen and then responding with jail time.

Responding with jail time is how you prevent it, through deterrence.

> I'm not saying we should prevent all book publishing, but you do understand what historical precedence I was referring to right?

Presumably the unconstitutional Son of Sam laws?

> If the dumb thing they're saying is that all politicians are satan worshipers and pedophiles, then it doesn't matter what "thing" I have to say to them.

I disagree. There are still things you can say and do to black pill the crazies.

Now, sometimes the only thing you can do to convince them is to do something, because just saying "no you're wrong" isn't much of an argument. Whereas, say, arresting and prosecuting everyone involved with Jeffrey Epstein would satisfy a lot more people that there isn't a vast international conspiracy of pedophile Satanist cannibals, as compared to the presumably truer situation in which a lot of powerful people were involved a major statutory rape and prostitution debacle and yet thus far have escaped prosecution.

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

#619

Post by armada651 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #618
armada651 wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But even for the people committing less violence than that, and who in turn eventually get released, they only stay released if they stay non-violent. Otherwise they're right back to jail. I am of the opinion that we should prevent violent insurrection rather than waiting for it to happen and then responding with jail time. > So now we're abandoning even the premise of free speech? Where did I say that? I'm not say…

> I am of the opinion that we should prevent violent insurrection rather than waiting for it to happen and then responding with jail time. Responding with jail time is how you prevent it, through deterrence. > I'm not saying we should prevent all book publishing, but you do understand what historical precedence I was referring to right? Presumably the unconstitutional Son of Sam laws? > If the dumb thing they're sayi…

> Presumably the unconstitutional Son of Sam laws?

I am not, I am referring to a historical example where a bunch of insurrectionists were thrown in jail and it was not an effective deterrent.

> Whereas, say, arresting and prosecuting everyone involved with Jeffrey Epstein would satisfy a lot more people

You really think that arresting and prosecuting Trump, among others, would satisfy the people who stormed the capitol to keep him in power?

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

#620

Post by jakelazaroff »

vfclists wrote: post #598
jakelazaroff wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is one electric company that serves my apartment. If I get cut off, I don’t get electricity. On the other hand, there are a thousand different cloud providers; surely at least one would have taken Parler on as a customer. And even failing that, it’s much easier for Parler to run their own servers than it is for me to run my own power plant.

Yes but they can only cut if you off for non payment, they can't cut you of for your political views. They can't even cut you off if you use your electricity to commit crimes.

Yes, because they’re a regulated monopoly. There are quite literally zero other ways to make electricity come out of my wall sockets. That’s not the case with AWS.
Post reply on HN