Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cloud providers • Hacker News Board

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

#261

Post by ogre_codes » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:35 PM UTC

cm2187 wrote: post #254

lliamander wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This threat is already mitigated by service contracts. AWS pretty obviously broke contract here, and will almost certain suffer legal consequences for that. Why they thought they could get away with it is unclear, but their rebuttle to Parler's claims is pretty weak.

But critical infrastructure is built on AWS. I don't understand how any CEO of any large company would be comfortable with the risk of getting the rug pulled underneath all of its critical systems given that this is just what happened. I think the reputational damage is, or at least should, be much greater than any Parler litigation.

> I don't understand how any CEO of any large company would be comfortable with the risk of getting the rug pulled underneath all of its critical systems given that this is just what happened.

If you are trying to make a case that Amazon arbitrarily pulls the plug on customers, Parler should not be your poster child. Amazon gave them 7 weeks of advance notice that their content was in violation of their agreement. Then they only severed the agreement once criminal activities were tied to the platforms content.

CEO's aren't going to bat an eye at this any more than they are concerned that YouTube removed copyrighted content.

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

#262

Post by anonymousDan » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:35 PM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #237

Aerroon wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Free expression is chaotic. It always has been and it always will be. It will always have lies and misinformation, some people will even believe the lies. But this is also the beauty of free expression - it prevents anyone from using it to enact total control. Speech that is free will always seed doubt against ideas, regardless whether those ideas are true or false. It's an avenue that allows anything to be questione…

> But this is also the beauty of free expression - it prevents anyone from using it to enact total control. This is the really tricky part, though... absolute free expression only prevents people from enacting total control if it persists; however, free speech is not something that can’t be undone. This is a form of the paradox of tolerance. If people use their absolute free speech to push lies and propaganda that al…

Right, lies and propaganda only have to win once.

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

#263

Post by erichocean » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:35 PM UTC

ogre_codes wrote: post #256

lliamander wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This threat is already mitigated by service contracts. AWS pretty obviously broke contract here, and will almost certain suffer legal consequences for that. Why they thought they could get away with it is unclear, but their rebuttle to Parler's claims is pretty weak.

Quite the opposite. Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract. Amazon could have terminated the agreement sooner. Since Amazon waited until after it was abundantly clear that harmful content was being posted on Parler, its going to be quite difficult for Parler to find much sympathy in any court.

> Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract.

Everything except for 30 days notice. Oops.

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

#264

Post by throwaway8250 » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:35 PM UTC

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…

[flagged]

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

#265

Post by bluescrn » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:35 PM UTC

Analemma_ wrote: post #190

bluescrn wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the speech really the problem, or the echo chambers within which it is spoken? The marketplace of ideas can't really function if people are only ever presented with a carefully tailored safe/comfortable subset of ideas.

But what’s the solution then? “We are going to forcibly expose you to speech you’d rather not see, for the greater good” is no less dystopian than just banning people.

In the old days of the Internet, you carefully selected the newsgroups and websites you wanted to read. This worked pretty well.

There were places where heated arguments about politics and religion took place, but it wasn't forced into your face as soon as you logged on. You had to choose to look for it. But if you just wanted to read about coding or sci-fi, discussions generally stayed on-topic.

We weren't in this crazy world of 'everyone's an activist'. We were in a world of 'Don't feed the trolls', and that was wise advice. Now you're essentially encouraged to bait the trolls to score 'likes' and 'karma points', bonus points for getting an opponent banned.

We can't uninvent social media, but maybe we can learn some lessons from the rather-less-destructive Internet of the past?

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

#266

Post by zaroth » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:36 PM UTC

pstuart wrote: post #204

jimmydorry wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She posted it again with impunity, so it basically was free, seeing as she was not deplatformed after the first or second time doing it.

She lost a lot of work over it -- therefore she did pay a price. As stupid and tasteless as it was, to make it into a call for others to cut off his head is specious at best. And that's a key issue in play: the intent of the the message. You're engaging in weak whataboutism.

I don’t see how this can be dismissed as “whataboutism” to discuss examples of how the specific policy under discussion should impact different types of speech.

It’s literally the topic of discussion. You could say, two sides of the same coin, but it’s not even really that.

Where do you draw the line for violence and inciteful speech? If you’re willing the draw a different line depending on the policy goals of the person speaking, then you’re taking a political position not a moral one.

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

#267

Post by lliamander » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:37 PM UTC

erichocean wrote: post #263

ogre_codes wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite the opposite. Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract. Amazon could have terminated the agreement sooner. Since Amazon waited until after it was abundantly clear that harmful content was being posted on Parler, its going to be quite difficult for Parler to find much sympathy in any court.

> Everything Amazon did was within the terms of their contract. Everything except for 30 days notice. Oops.

And opportunity to cure.

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

#268

Post by erichocean » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:38 PM UTC

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…

Ah, the evergreen "I don't believe any of this, but hopefully you do so you'll do what I want" argument.

The correct response is tit-for-tat: always refuse to abide by principles your enemies refuse to accept even if you privately think those principles are worthwhile.

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

#269

Post by ThrowawayR2 » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:38 PM UTC

NationalPark wrote: post #248

ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> " spam, illegal pornography, and deliberate impersonation " Please stop repeating this tired meme. All of things in that list are off-topic or outright against the law; nobody wants to receive those things. The topic is and always was removal of unpopular speech that is 1) on-topic 2) between consenting parties who consciously wanted to send and receive those messages 3) mostly not illegal. (Yes, of course, the ill…

If your position is genuinely that you believe website operators should be mandated by law to host content they do not want to host except when that content has been specifically determined to be illegal, then we simply disagree on that point - I think that would make the world a worse place and I prefer the world where that rule is not in effect. But if you believe in allowing the tiniest ounce of operator discretio…

> "If your position is genuinely that you believe website operators should be mandated by law to host content they do not want to host except when that content has been specifically determined to be illegal, then we simply disagree on that point."

That's another meme I see repeated a lot. If we go back before 1950, the same argument you are making was used justify businesses refusing to provide service to women, minorities, LGBT people, etc. It's funny to see people supposedly on the left recycling discredited arguments from the bigoted right to justify their behavior today.

Society had to create protected classes, making something illegal that was already intrinsically immoral, to make clear that the argument you are trying to make is bogus. Perhaps it's time for liberals (and I mean actual liberals, not the left) to campaign to make political affiliation a protected class too.

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

#270

Post by trident5000 » Mon, Jan 18, 2021, 11:39 PM UTC

pbourke wrote: post #200

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I think the legal status quo is pretty close to ideal: governments may not limit speech, but platforms can clamp down on anything they want. The only problem with the platforms is that they still somewhat cling to the idea that they won’t censor speech, which is frankly ridiculous. Of course they will censor, they should just admit it and clamp down any speech they find abhorrent. Allow the marketplace (and…

The status quo has brought us to today. The platforms only act when they see that the political winds have shifted. There were precisely zero “profiles in courage” among the platforms until after the election. We can expect nothing more - they’re businesses beholden to investors and regulators above all else.

I'm surprised at the lack of recognition that Google and Apple banned Parler as soon as the dems gained all 3 branches of power. It could not be more clear what the motive was. Extremism and violence are on Twitter and Facebook all day long. They're still in the app stores.