121–130 of 520 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter? Parler was a scapegoat to deflect attention from the rest of this category of software.
Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter all had moderation (whether its effective is another debate). It's hardly an apples-to-apples co.parison with Parler.
Why?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going with another major scale cloud provider was definitely poor planning there
Proper planning would have been what, coloing hundreds of servers worth millions of dollars as a DR plan? And having no guarantee that the colo provider wouldn't also deplatform them?
Not surprising, when your first and foremost duty as the headhoncho should be doing what you can to keep your site online. It's been almost a month that the site has been down for now. Yes, an outage should be expected when you get deplatformed at a network level... however they could not put up anything more than a status page in this time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No colo is going to touch them, because if they did whatever other existing business they had would leave. Which of course, is the real reason AWS turfed them, and no other cloud provider will pick them up. Not even Oracle, who are desperate for any cloud attention and were buddy buddy with Trump are taking Parler's calls.
Oracle's more correctly buddy buddy with the US government, so obviously they ain't inclined to be welcoming of people who tried to interfere with said government.
> We believe privacy is paramount and free speech essential, especially on social media. this, from their "technical difficulties" notice, should have been enough for him to be fired on its own. requiring some users to provide government identification, building such weak security that anyone can read and archive private messages, and not stripping out damaging meta-data from media posts are three ways to not provide…
Parler should not have been de-platformed. That was a clearly partisan act, and the truth would have come out shortly about the company's total lack of care for its users. Say what you will about Gab, but they never pulled any of those stunts. Looking forward to whatever the new solution is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going with another major scale cloud provider was definitely poor planning there
Proper planning would have been what, coloing hundreds of servers worth millions of dollars as a DR plan? And having no guarantee that the colo provider wouldn't also deplatform them?
> We believe privacy is paramount and free speech essential, especially on social media. this, from their "technical difficulties" notice, should have been enough for him to be fired on its own. requiring some users to provide government identification, building such weak security that anyone can read and archive private messages, and not stripping out damaging meta-data from media posts are three ways to not provide…
As someone who does deeply believe in and care about free speech (from all parties), I could not be in deeper agreement with you. (for non-native English speakers: I fully agree). Parler should not have been de-platformed. That was a clearly partisan act, and the truth would have come out shortly about the company's total lack of care for its users. Say what you will about Gab, but they never pulled any of those stun…
You obviously did not see the material that the company allowed to be posted on their services in contravention to their hosting provider's terms of services.
Always abide by your host's AUP. Otherwise, you can get yeeted.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are the permissionless decentralized tools really not prepared for any level of throughput yet? Nope. Since Web browsers don't speak any fancy decentralized protocols you either need a centralized/censored gateway like ipfs.io or everyone has to install client software which kills adoption.
Isn't parler's primary userbase a phone app (i.e. client software)?
I am not sad :-). But it is interesting in this day and age to just flat out terminate the CEO. It seems like most have a contract and firing them creates a exposure to risk. (hence all the negotiated exits). That makes me curious to know if he was working without a contract or they had a really solid 'for cause' case against him.