41–50 of 327 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems pretty cut and dry; DDoS-Guard would need a physical presence there to operate, they didn't, so the IPs were revoked. The phone call was simply a tip to investigate.
Not quite. > DDoS-Guard CEO Evgeniy Marchenko maintains the company has done nothing wrong, and that DDoS-Guard does indeed have a presence in Belize. So they acted without any investigation because "uh oh, here comes the mob".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, freedom[0] of speech[1]. 0: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200630/23525844821/parle... 1: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-pr...
What's your point?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems pretty cut and dry; DDoS-Guard would need a physical presence there to operate, they didn't, so the IPs were revoked. The phone call was simply a tip to investigate.
Not quite. > DDoS-Guard CEO Evgeniy Marchenko maintains the company has done nothing wrong, and that DDoS-Guard does indeed have a presence in Belize. So they acted without any investigation because "uh oh, here comes the mob".
> DDoS-Guard CEO Evgeniy Marchenko maintains the company has done nothing wrong, and that DDoS-Guard does indeed have a presence in Belize.
Which clearly does not support anything else in your comment, or rebut anything in the comment you're replying to.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea anyone we label violent extremists should be completely and utterly deplatformed. Also reported to their employer so they cannot earn money that enables them to commit more violence.
> anyone we label violent extremists should be completely and utterly deplatformed They've labeled themselves, though, by espousing violent extremist views.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why are you praising someone with too much time on their hands attempting to limit freedom of speech? Really sad and pathetic.
Ah yes, freedom[0] of speech[1]. 0: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200630/23525844821/parle... 1: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-pr...
These goings-on make me very aware of the fact that I'm still not settled on the matter of free speech. I used to be very pro-free-speech, but on the other hand, I'm anti-fascism, and I don't know what's worse: Giving fascists a platform to spew hate, or set a precedent for potentially limiting my own speech down the line? It's nowhere near clear-cut, and I'd like to hear some opinions on this.
Cory Doctorow:
https://pluralistic.net/2021/01/09/the-old-crow-is-getting-s...
> It's reasonable to say that Parler should use a mix of automated tools and human judgment to block unlawful speech and/or hate speech - but it's NOT the reason that Appl/Goog have removed it. Both companies have made it clear in their public communications that Parler must install an effective hate-speech filter to qualify for inclusion in their stores.
> I hope we can all agree that "effective hate-speech filter" is a nonexistent technology, and that therefore none of the existing services whose apps appear in either app store have such a technology in place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea anyone we label violent extremists should be completely and utterly deplatformed. Also reported to their employer so they cannot earn money that enables them to commit more violence.
> anyone we label violent extremists should be completely and utterly deplatformed They've labeled themselves, though, by espousing violent extremist views.
These goings-on make me very aware of the fact that I'm still not settled on the matter of free speech. I used to be very pro-free-speech, but on the other hand, I'm anti-fascism, and I don't know what's worse: Giving fascists a platform to spew hate, or set a precedent for potentially limiting my own speech down the line? It's nowhere near clear-cut, and I'd like to hear some opinions on this.
If you only allowed the speech you didn’t have a problem with, then you wouldn’t need the concept of free speech. On the other hand I hate all fascists too and they are violent terrorists so there is no point in pondering philosophy for their sake.
Well that's exactly the question: Is free speech more societally useful than disallowing the kinds of speech I disagree with?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah yes, freedom[0] of speech[1]. 0: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200630/23525844821/parle... 1: https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20200627/23551144803/as-pr...
What's your point?
These goings-on make me very aware of the fact that I'm still not settled on the matter of free speech. I used to be very pro-free-speech, but on the other hand, I'm anti-fascism, and I don't know what's worse: Giving fascists a platform to spew hate, or set a precedent for potentially limiting my own speech down the line? It's nowhere near clear-cut, and I'd like to hear some opinions on this.
Yeah, the only “free speech” Parler allows for that Facebook/Twitter don’t is racist bigotry + insurrectionist content, so I’m pretty much entirely on the side of “wipe them off the web”