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

Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 984 posts

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#211

Post by notabee »

whatshisface wrote: post #144
pmlnr wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought it's obvious from the context, but examples include denying the holocaust being a crime.

I don't see why a future collapse into tyranny of a country in Europe would have to involve a revival of the symbols of any particular defeated regime. If they needed symbols for propaganda purposes, they'd draw from legal symbol pools, like Roman culture. (It "worked" once...) More likely, they would draw from contemporary symbols that already had positive sentiment associated with them. The point being, it's not cl…

Symbols retain power for a long time. That's why we're not seeing a swastika revival in interior design or anything like that, even in places where the Nazis did not exist. Another good example is the U.S. confederate flag, which only existed officially for a few years and was decided against by a bloody and brutal military loss. However, it's retained enough significance that someone just pranced through the U.S. Capitol with it. If it doesn't have power as a symbol, why not pick a new flag?

Obviously banning a symbol is not going to prevent future violent movements by itself, but it also seems wise to not leave still-hot embers of symbolic power lying around for the next would-be demagogue to fan back into a fire. People trying to pick up those old symbols are giving a very strong signal about their ideology.

I agree that the main bulwark of a society against falling into fascism is its people's memory of the past and willingness to prevent recurrence of such episodes though.

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#212

Post by mcguire »

Playing the devil's advocate here: is this really "exceptional power"?

Before the Internet, fringe, extremist political movements had essentially the same options as every other minor interest group: local groups, physical, mailed newsletters, maybe magazines, booths at whatever kind of group meetings, and maybe news media coverage. All of those options still exist. So the modern state of things hasn't removed anything.

Since the age of the Internet, cloud providers have the same power as any other hosting provider: Geocities, Angelfire, AOL, whatever; they all have acceptable use policies that will get you taken down if you don't obey them. Outside of those, colocation and network providers seem a bit more willing to tolerate things, but they can still cut you off, just like they (sometimes) did in the good old days. And you can still go full-on backbone peer, if you can afford it, which these political groups certainly can.

The bottom line is, you have your old options and you can still host yourself. You have options in between, but if they decide you aren't playing nice, they can hurt you.

The only thing "exceptional" here is the nature and vocality of the groups in question.

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#213

Post by grecy »

dfgdghdf wrote: post #176

Here's how I might open a debate with right-leaning people about freedom of speech. If you sell a product, but make false claims about that product, then you are committing fraud. You have harmed someone (financially) with your speech, and contract laws rightly overrule freedom of speech here. So, if you believe in contract law, which is essential for free markets, then you must believe in limitations on speech... th…

Your example is an interesting one, because I think it just shows there are consequences for certain types of speech, but that speech is still very much possible.

Kind of like how I can park without feeding the meter, and the "consequences" are just tickets. At no point can my license be revoked if I always pay all the tickets.

So getting back to your analogy, if I use speech to make false claims about a product I will get a hefty fine, but there is nothing physically stopping me from doing exactly the same thing tomorrow.

The speech isn't actually prohibited or "denied" anymore than me parking illegal is, there are just consequences if I choose to do it.

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#214

Post by rtkwe »

decasia wrote: post #24
millzlane wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TBH most "Free speech" platforms will allow anything except fraud, child porn, and calls to violence that violate criminal law. Baring all of that. There are still places online to host whatever you want.

Yeah, I know those services are out there. I thought most of them were physically located outside North America though, is that not true?

It's mixed and depends a lot on how far they go into the unmoderated depths. Gab and Parler for example are US company while there's 8kun/chan that are overseas and go/went way further into illegal content.

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#215

Post by Acrobatic_Road »

travisporter wrote: post #147
trident5000 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mean like when Kathy Griffin was holding up the presidents bloody head with no recourse? Or the summer riots which were heavily coordinated on Twitter? Twitter is still in the app stores. Extremism is on Twitter, Facebook, and all platforms, yet they came together like a mob and eliminated the one they didnt like.

Yes, I agree. Iran's supreme leader is still on twitter. But a counterpoint is that that ISIS was driven out of twitter and FB systematically. Correct me but you're implying in your statement is they "eliminated the one they didn't like [because of political views]" but that's not necessarily the only reason EDIT: Given your other responses, we're at an impasse. Bowing out.

ISIS and other islamists are very much still on twitter.

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#216

Post by ogre_codes »

slcjordan wrote: post #191
ogre_codes wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Parler has hosted content no worse than Twitter or Facebook or thousands of other sites. Nonsense. Parler was created because Twitter and Facebook were moderating content. If Twitter and Facebook hadn't been moderating hate speech, Parler would not exist. Posting voices and content which is banned on Twitter and Facebook is the single unique "Feature" of Parler. Over the months, Amazon has been in contact with Parl…

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't some of the Parler violent content and speech that violated the TOS still on Twitter in the form of screenshots? Or have there been efforts by big tech to remove them too?

I'm sure some of it is in the form of screenshots. But Amazon's court filing shows plenty that is in plain text.

https://deadline.com/2021/01/amazon-court-filing-parler-for-...

If Amazon can find it and has identified it, why won't Parler remove it?

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#217

Post by foolinaround »

There is now a new risk that needs to be mitigated by the business, that of its business being taken down for any reason at all - subject to the whims of a changing culture, and possibly even outside of the laws of the land one is in.

This will hopefully make folks think through the entire supply chain including cloud and SaaS providers.

AWS was always like renting an apartment, or even, a fully furnished apartment. At some point, you want your own house and land...

I hope that there will be a new impetus to replace the above with colocated servers that are just being managed, and by services that are sold for a period of time, and hosted by the applications themselves.

k8s might hopefully be used to build a more resilient infrastructure that can take these systemic shocks.

There could be good business for a new class of sub-contractors who would have templates to automate this for their clients.

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#219

Post by lliamander »

lisper wrote: post #11

I gotta say, recent events have left me shaken to my core. I thought I believed in free speech, to the point where I started a company dedicated to providing privacy and communications products that were not subject to control by any central authority (that turns out to be very hard!) But watching the events of the past few years unfold I am no longer convinced that this would really make the world a better place. I…

Do you forget the lies that got the U.S. into the first and second Gulf War? The cover-up of the NSA surveillance state? The Vientam War? The Church and Pike committees? The lies covering up the excesses of the USSR (including the Holomdor)?

I do not subscribe to the notion that authoritative sources always lie, but the lies they do tell are by far the most damaging in terms of their cost in human life.

The only way to fight that is with freedom of speech. Yes, people will abuse it, but the cost is still absolutely worth it.

Re: Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers

#220

Post by jeromegv »

MichaelRazum wrote: post #149
NationalPark wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh. I am unbelievably tired of people setting this up as "pro free speech" vs "anti free speech". It's inflammatory (who proudly calls themselves "anti-free speech"? It's bad faith just to say that. Anyway.) and it's misleading. Most critically, almost everyone fundamentally agrees that censorship is a good thing, in principle. Even the most extreme "free speech" oriented websites remove spam, illegal pornography,…

I think the discussion shouldn't be about what should be censorship but rather who decides it. So if you put, lets say illegal pornography, on your page, then there is a law that forbids it. Especially in a good system the person who posted it gets prosecuted. On the other hand if companies act like judge and low, it can lead to bad things I think.

Inciting violence and overthrowing a government is already as illegal as child pornography is. Would you rather have all child pornography kept online up until a judge has declared that person guilty?
Post reply on HN