Parler CEO says he was fired by board

Post by watwut » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:20 AM UTC

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #163

jerrysievert wrote: post #80

> 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…

When Parler praises "free speech" they're really just using that as a cover for running a cheap Twitter clone with no investment in moderation. They exist to extract profit with minimum overhead.

Post by 8note » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:21 AM UTC

skinnymuch wrote: post #117

pocw wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That works until your colo provider tells you to take a walk. Your landlord evicts you from warehouse where you host your backup datacenter space, your ISP cuts you off. It's almost like everybody drew the line at openly planning insurrection. Maybe they could have tried not doing that?

Plenty of sites stay up that are not liked by powers to be. White supremacist forums. Or Pirate Bay

Post by 8note » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:25 AM UTC

echelon wrote: post #136

pocw wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That works until your colo provider tells you to take a walk. Your landlord evicts you from warehouse where you host your backup datacenter space, your ISP cuts you off. It's almost like everybody drew the line at openly planning insurrection. Maybe they could have tried not doing that?

You're making a value judgment when my argument is simply about keeping your website alive in the face of powers that wish to control or censor you. Imagine hypothetically that you have website about the plight of the Uyghurs and Amazon was a Chinese business. Amazon's behavior revealed they are not above terminating service for businesses. I can imagine a world where they become emboldened and attempt to deny servic…

Post by watwut » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:26 AM UTC

skynet-9000 wrote: post #146

dralley wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Always abide by your host's AUP." These basically say things like "your users may not use the services to offend others." That's literally impossible to abide by. In fact, it appears to have been a company-ending event in this case, which makes it a devilishly simple attack: post something you know will get everyone worked up, et viola: you just killed a company. The way you're wording this sounds very much like yo…

I'm not sure what you mean by that. I read the AWS response. Nothing there seemed to be much worse than I've seen on Twitter (actually, Twitter stuff was far worse). Regardless, this is besides the point: all a competitor has to do is post some garbage and point to it, and boom, you're dead. That's not ok.

Post by lawnchair_larry » Thu, Feb 04, 2021, 7:27 AM UTC

ramraj07 wrote: post #255

skynet-9000 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

If you keep insisting parler as a bastion of free speech then there's not much to argue with you. It was a clearly partisan highly censored place where anything other than right wing commentary was not tolerated. If signal gets deplatformed get your pitchforks. Till then I'm not worried. Also regarding the slippery slope, let it slide. If this is how we start regulating cloud services as utilities then so be it.