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

#671

Post by ReflectedImage » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:14 AM UTC

FireBeyond wrote: post #618

ganoushoreilly wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, and it's fucking stupid they didn't have appropriate security given the nature of the day. The insurrection didn't start on that day. If the label is being applied, it started when police were assaulted, innocents were maimed and murdered, mass scale breakdowns of security and control were in play, and collectives attempted things as extraneous as declaring parts of the United States an Autonomous zone, a clear…

Fucking stupid? It seems at this point to be quite likely deliberate. Multiple requests for aid were refused, or ignored. The security at the Capitol was half the size as it was when a group of army veterans marched for disabled vets rights a few years ago. That's not fucking stupid, that's an entirely deliberate and reasoned choice.

Some explanation, in a coup the countries security forces pull back to allow the protesters into the main government buildings so they can deal with the current officials.

The security forces then get rid of the protesters and the new set of officials move in.

It's just how it works.

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

#672

Post by nitrogen » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:14 AM UTC

ipsocannibal wrote: post #91

lisper wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And they are wrong as evidenced by many Supreme Court rulings. Right. Because the Supreme Court never makes a mistake, never reverses itself, and is completely immune to political influence. If your best argument for being optimistic about the future of civilization is the Supreme Court then you've just made my point for me.

I think you made your point, or lack there of, when you considered my point invalid due to the lack of absolute perfection and infallibility of Supreme Court rulings. Absolutist thinking is generally a sign of a weak argument. Oh yeah, "as evidenced" doesn't mean "due to" as well. You might want to work on your reading comprehension there. The Supreme Court is mearly ratifying what the majority of Americans will acce…

Supreme Court is [merely] ratifying what the majority of Americans will accept.

If this were true then we wouldn't need a Supreme Court at all, and/or it wouldn't matter who gets appointed.

You used the word "wrong". The SC doesn't decide right and wrong. The SC decides what the MO of the government will be, until Congress or a future SC changes it. It's a statement of position, a very powerful one, but not a statement of correctness. The history of the SC makes clear that treating what they say as "right" and everyone else as "wrong" won't lead to any consistent sense of right or wrong.

It's a fundamental principle of the US that people can hold opinions that differ from the current law of the land.

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

#673

Post by slibhb » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:14 AM UTC

tw04 wrote: post #460

smsm42 wrote: post #257

That is the most depressing part for me - how easily American society is scared into giving up their freedom ideals. Turns out they don't have to be threatened with overwhelming force. They don't need to be threatened with death, starvation or torture. They don't need to be threatened by economic ruin or untold suffering. No, the richest and most safe civilization ever existed on the face of the planet is ready to gi…

Hang on: so because they failed at killing elected officials, there's nothing to worry about? You can tell us for certain that had one of the officers not lead them away from Pence he would've been safe? Based on...? Should we let the Michigan militia that was going to murder the governor off, since they just talked about it but didn't actually do it... Because they were caught.

You're responding to a sentiment that was never expressed. No one said they should be "let off".

Even if Pence had been killed, American democracy would not be in danger. Presidents have been killed and democracy survived intact.

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

#674

Post by smichel17 » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:16 AM UTC

XorNot wrote: post #627

smichel17 wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we get some number or range for "lots of"? I imagine those words mean wildly different things (1-2 orders of magnitude) to different people.

I mean pipe bombs were found at both political party headquarters, so how many bombs is enough to be serious?

You're ascribing intent to my words where there is none. I have no interest in arguing my opinion here.

I am interested in reading other people's thoughtfully formed opinions. Using words like "lots of" without clarifying further seems likely to lead to people talking past each other. That's why I commented.

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

#675

Post by imgabe » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:16 AM UTC

vharuck wrote: post #583

imgabe wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the la…

>Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? I'm no historian, so was there ever a time the killing was instigated by a sitting politician who then was not punished? (Yes, the Senate has yet to decide, but chances are they won't vote for removal or banning from office). Because politicians trying to have their political oppone…

> Because politicians trying to have their political opponents harmed or killed is basically all one needs to have fake democracy.

I don't follow this logic. Assume for the sake of argument that politician A attempts to have politician B killed (also not a historian, but I feel there has to be at least one instance of this happening somewhere, at some point in US history). Based on this event, we now conclude that the entire democracy is fake? How? All of the votes for all other politicians are now invalid? The electoral process (largely out of the control of any single politician) just ... goes away? How do you figure? What's the cause and effect mechanism there?

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

#676

Post by IfOnlyYouKnew » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:16 AM UTC

hartator wrote: post #49

I don’t get all the anti free speech comments here. I rather live in a country with real free speech but no democracy than the reverse. You can’t have democracy without free speech.

There’s no definition of democracy that does not include free speech.

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

#677

Post by tw04 » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:17 AM UTC

imgabe wrote: post #493

slg wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't believe this needs to be said, but the fact it failed doesn't mean the danger wasn't real. Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy.

> Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the la…

>Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy?

How many times in the history of the US, has the president asked his supporters to bring violence against his political opponents?

>What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but no it was never going to destroy the country or end democracy. This is hyperbole people are using to grab and consolidate power.

If half of the population believes that elections are not fair, it will absolutely, positively destroy democracy. The very foundation of democracy is fair elections.

>Democracy is not a single person that can be killed and taken over. It's all of us acting in concert to uphold those values. It doesn't end by this person or that person being killed, it ends by all of us collectively agreeing to give up the values that make it work. That's the real threat here.

shouldn't be. People should use critical thinking skills, and not be persuaded by charlatans. All of that depends on them actively seeking the truth, and we've seen first hand that a large portion of the US population isn't interested in actively seeking the truth, they're looking to have their beliefs reaffirmed. When Rudy Giuliani gets on TV and proclaims fraudulent elections, then goes into a court room and admits there's no fraud (because he'd go to prison for lying to the court), but 50% of the population only ever bothers to listen to what he says on TV we've got serious problems.

https://www.salon.com/2020/11/18/judge-cancels-fraud-evidenc...

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

#678

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:18 AM UTC

tw04 wrote: post #677

imgabe wrote: post #493

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Some members of the mob were actively looking to kill the people who were 2nd and 3rd in line for the presidency. Let's not pretend that there was zero danger to democracy. Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the la…

>Do you realize that numerous times throughout history people have successfully killed the actual president and it didn't end democracy? How many times in the history of the US, has the president asked his supporters to bring violence against his political opponents? >What these people did was a serious crime and it should absolutely be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, but no it was never going to destroy th…

[deleted]

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

#679

Post by 3np » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:18 AM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #644

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 con…

Minimum notice is pretty common by law, for one thing.

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

#680

Post by nitrogen » Tue, Jan 19, 2021, 3:18 AM UTC

cousin_it wrote: post #194

Consultant32452 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think there's a credible threat to civilization, but perhaps a credible threat to our prevailing thoughts on governance. There is no good justification that the people of Los Angeles should have to live under the rules and cultural customs of Mobile Alabama. Nor should the people of Mobile Alabama be forced to live under the rules and cultural norms of Los Angeles. As long as we re forced to toggle back and f…

It's a pretty dark path then. There aren't many examples of countries separating peacefully.

There are examples of federal systems where things that can be agreed upon are shared at the federal level, and things where disagreements cannot be reconciled are managed at the state level.

One of the ways we've gone wrong as a society recently is thinking that there can only be one way, and everyone has to adhere to it. People need to be allowed to disagree, because everyone will find themselves on the side of "wrong" (i.e. less optimal for achieving one's goals) at some point.