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

#641

Post by jacquesm » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 2:55 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #634

jacquesm wrote: post #595

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about that one side stops peddling conspiracy theories and following every idiot that promises them what they want to hear in terms of gun rights, abortion and immigration. Compromise = fact based middle ground between reasonable people. When one side consistently treats politics like winner-takes-all and lies out of their asses to get to power and to stay in power then the burden to compromise would be on them.

So the answer is, you want to win rather than heal political schisms. Which is a perfectly fine answer! But that's the approach the other side has taken also, and well here we are. Politics isn't about rationality or facts or what one side thinks is "reasonable." Nobody approaches the Israel/Palestine conflict by asking "well who has the more rational argument here?" That would be silly. Politics is about power, and…

I think you mistook my reply.

Politics is all about facts and rationality, if it isn't then it will quickly cause your country of choice to slide down into the gutter of irrelevance. The essence of politics in democratic countries is people trying to self-govern with some kind of optimum outcome for the largest number of people involved.

And the Israel/Palestine conflict would improve lots if people started using facts rather than 'might makes right'.

Politics is only about power in some parts of the world, in other parts of the world people are actually trying to get along with each other.

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

#642

Post by __turbobrew__ » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 2:56 AM 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…

9/11 shook many to their core which lead to the Patriot Act. Now — almost 20 years later — every conversation is tracked, every packet intercepted, 19 years of war overseas, millions killed or displaced, extrajudicial detainment and torture abroad, unaccountable secret government entities.

Time will only tell whether the existential threat of free speech is real, but my best guess in “no”: people are still in shock of recent events, but over time it will be clear that giving up our freedoms in a rash reaction to a crisis is not the right decision.

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

#643

Post by ganoushoreilly » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 2:57 AM UTC

acdha wrote: post #624

ganoushoreilly wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Call this an insurrection and lambast the crazies for attempting to do whatever it is they were doing, but equally admonish the same that has been transpiring for months. This is no greater a risk or threat than the ongoing actions we've been subjected to for months. It's all chaos and it's chaos that will be used as a means to reign in more control on freedoms and rights.

> This is no greater a risk or threat than the ongoing actions we've been subjected to for months. When did non-right-wing protesters invade a seat of government? When did they brandish guns while threatening political violence against politicians? When did they reject the results of an election? When did they invade a legislature trying to prevent normal government activities? More importantly, compare the reactions…

It is obvious you're choosing to selectively argue. The riots made attempts at government, people stormed buildings in Seattle, many others. The bottom line is, you are choosing to argue one side is horrible the other is just. I am arguing that both sides have been horrible. Until you can acknowledge that the same actions have been occurring for a year it's not worth engaging further.

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

#644

Post by snowwrestler » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 2:57 AM UTC

apple_innocent wrote: post #337

"In 2010, DNA sequencing company Complete Genomics said that "an interruption of services by Amazon Web Services, on whom we rely to deliver finished genomic data to our customers, would result in our customers not receiving their data on time." Gaming company Zynga warned about how its AWS foundation could quickly vanish when it filed the prospectus for its initial public offering in 2011. "AWS may terminate the agr…

Are there enterprise contracts that do not have provisions under which the supplier can end the relationship for cause?

I have a hard time believing the lawyers for a supplier would let them sign a contract that requires them to provide service to a customer under any and all circumstances with no way out.

Edit to add: if you stick servers in a colo data center instead of signing with AWS, doesn’t the data center contract give them the right to evict you under certain circumstances? If you lease office space, doesn’t the lease usually have terms under which the property owner can evict you for cause?

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

#645

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 2:59 AM UTC

jariel wrote: post #622

caseysoftware wrote: post #581

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for clarifying. I think your example is perfect: Your conspiracy theory is not based facts, law, or well-established interpretations of either and yet you're fully bought in and sharing it. I see how that could be dangerous, but I think silencing you would be worse for you personally and society as a whole. Just don't threaten violence and we're good.

Answer the question: 'Who would be President on Jan 20?' - if the vote to approve the electoral results on Jan 6th were not completed - or - if the results provided by the states were 'rejected' by a congressional vote. ? Bonus points if you can tell us how the 20th Amendment clarifies that for us. Also, irrespective of what the legal outcome might be, what would most US citizens actually believe? Would the losing fa…

> Who would be President on Jan 20?' - if the vote to approve the electoral results on Jan 6th were not completed [...] Bonus points if you can tell us how the 20th Amendment clarifies that for us.

Nancy Pelosi.

Amendment XX: “The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January [...] If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified."

3 USC § 19(a)(1): “If, by reason of death, resignation, removal from office, inability, or failure to qualify, there is neither a President nor Vice President to discharge the powers and duties of the office of President, then the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall, upon his resignation as Speaker and as Representative in Congress, act as President.”

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

#646

Post by ogre_codes » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 2:59 AM UTC

foolinaround wrote: post #615

ogre_codes wrote: post #526

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you point to where in AWS TOS this is defined? It's laid out in the court documents. https://deadline.com/2021/01/amazon-court-filing-parler-for-... > We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle we fall on. I'm not sure what you are talking about here? We need to agree that Amazon's Terms of Service are subjective? Or are we going to start digging…

let me step back 1 more time... forget court cases, Parler - what its doing etc. -- lets focus on tech perspective take a tech CTO, who looks at AWS TOS. Do you find any terms that provide details on the moderation needed? There can be any number of apps and business models -- so when his company gets such a notice, what can be done? there was also the case of a baker who disagreed to serve gay people with their wedd…

> This is a huge risk, and new business models will emerge to help mitigate this risk

There is always a risk when you build your business on a platform then blatantly ignore the contract you sign. Most businesses will mitigate this risk by actually reading and following the terms of contracts they enter into.

The business model you are referring to is called having a legal department. Most businesses do.

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

#647

Post by jacquesm » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:01 AM UTC

sanderjd wrote: post #637

dragonwriter wrote: post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The danger is unreal not because it failed, but because it was obviously going to fail They came very close to having members in the hands of the mob; I think you very much overestimate what was required for this to succeed. Even if the mob itself was disavowed, simply getting a presiding officer more that would be more sympathetic to the President’s interests int he circumstances (which probably would have taken a…

It is making me very disappointed that all the good comments in this thread are downvoted and all the bad ones upvoted. Looking like end times for this community, to me. I don't want to participate in a community with a bunch of insurrection apologists.

Essentially you're talking about roughly 33% or so of the American electorate, that's bound to get some downvotes, I wouldn't sweat it, note the good guys, upvote them where you can and stick around to stop it from sliding away even further. And yes, it is annoying. Also: typically it corrects itself in the longer run, so don't take a snapshot like this as the end state.

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

#648

Post by chrononaut » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:03 AM UTC

smsm42 wrote: post #343

boxed wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is the richest only on average, and not the safest by an stretch of the imagination.

Which civilization in history was safer? Tell me you criterion of safety and your example, let's see if I need to be corrected.

> Which civilization in history was safer?

"Safer" in what respects? Personal safety?

The US is 94/230 for countries with highest intentional murders per capita.[0] St. Louis and Baltimore rank 9 and 11 as highest murders per capita by cities across the entire world.[1] US ranks 14/116 with the highest rapes per capita.[2]

There are plenty of governments and societies safer than the US with regards to personal safety.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate [2] https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Crime/Violen...

> Tell me you criterion of safety and your example, let's see if I need to be corrected.

You are aware you're the one who made the argument that the US is the "most safe civilization ever existed on the face of the planet", and you are not specifying what the criteria you used to evaluate that?

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

#649

Post by sanderjd » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:04 AM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #358

stolen_biscuit wrote: post #330

A portion of your citizens were called to storm your nations capital by a President who refuses to accept the results of a democratic election. The very foundation of your democracy has been eroded. Do not pretend the people who are frightened of these actions are overreacting. Democracy is a fragile thing, and you have a portion of your population who attempted to take a hammer to it. Don't pretend this is a narrati…

Can you articulate a plausible (does not rely on significant speculation or hypotheticals) series of events at the Capitol incident that could have resulted in democracy being legitimately lost in America? I am unable to come up with one.

This is a very easy exercise: instead of cowering while letting other people take risks in his name, President Trump walks over to the Capitol. With him at the head of the column, many more people storm the building (the Capitol police likely don't put up a fight because nobody told them to fight the President), they occupy the building and take representatives hostage. At this point in time there is no longer a democracy in the US. What happens after that is anybody's guess; by my lights, probably the military leaders don't the President, their troops mostly follow their orders, they retake the Capitol, restore power to Congress, and install Pence as President, followed by democracy being restored not long after by a quick 25th amendment or impeachment and removal. But it would be plausible that some number of the military's leaders choose to back the President instead, or that an insufficient number of the troops follow their orders, resulting in either a successful coup or a protracted civil war.

The only thing that saved us from this was Trump's cowardice.

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

#650

Post by Pxtl » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:04 AM 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…

I've reconciled my newfound disinterest in the principle of freedom of expression like this:

Lies and threats are already illegal if you lie about a person who has the power and standing to use the court system to enforce that.

If harmfully you lie in the legal system, it's perjury or filing a false report.

If you lie to trick somebody into giving you money (and they can show damages and standing), it's fraud or false advertising.

If you lie to hurt somebody, it's defamation... again, if they can show damages and standing and they have the money for lawyers

And threats of violence are theoretically illegal but basically you need a good lawyer to get that enforced.

But now, we have vicious rumors about objective facts. Threats against reality itself. Global Warming can't sue for defamation. BLM and Antifa activists aren't even members of a real organization - could they even sue about the vicious lies about them, if they had the money to do so?

If a thousand loosely affiliated people push information about a vague cabal of vampiric pedophiles and one of them snaps and "heroically" kills somebody, who is liable for speeding the defamatory information that led to that death? If it was one, clear person, it would be a clear crime with a clear defendant.... But if it's thousands of anonymous trolls, does that make it legal, or does it simply make the laws judging it illegal impractical to enforce?

I think Dominion Voting Systems is one of the few orgs trapped in this web of deception that is actually a clear legal entity that has standing to sue and can show real damages from all the slander about them.

Basically, harmful lies are theoretically illegal but defacto legal. So I'm okay with finding alternate means to close the gap between theory and practice, in the absence of a proper legal framework.