Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

1b677b8f8bb20100.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 218 posts

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#181

Post by waterhouse »

ccortes wrote: post #87

Ok so according to this you can't delete anything. What happens then if I want to delete something I posted previously? Is it free speech if I want to retract something posted by myself but I'm not able to do so? Is it really free speech if a comment can't be altered/deleted by the owner of it?

> according to this you can't delete anything.

This is a property of the internet and information in general. If data was served to clients at some point, then it's possible for the clients to have saved a copy (if nothing else then by taking a picture of the screen). Even if it happens that no one saved a copy, it's not generally possible to be sure of that. Any "deletion" feature would therefore be unreliable at best.

Being able to "edit" posts, to submit a new version of a post and have clients by convention normally show the newest version, sounds like a decent feature. (The older versions would, of course, be available too.)

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#182

Post by giveexamples »

cmeacham98 wrote: post #169
giveexamples wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no doubt that shaming people with bad opinions will make them stop these opinions, at least in public. However I assume that you are the right person to judge 'bad' opinions? If not you individually, maybe should select certain group of people to represent the people and create rules to enforce bad behavior is stopped? Maybe we can call this body a government and call the rules laws.

Where did I claim that I was the right person to judge this for all of society? I make these choices for myself by choosing what types of people I associate with, and I am a tiny part of making this decision for society at large by voting. In my opinion, society is more tolerant when we do not let the intolerant people hijack it to spread intolerance. In other words, intolerance is some of that "bad behavior" that sh…

There are at least two types of tolerance - for ideas (eg censorship), for people (eg racial conflict). I believe we should accept both sorts of intolerance but to a degree.

For ideas - remove ideas by banning / censorship, or add ideas by promoting 'better' ideas - this seems like a possible avenue to improving society's mental health. The main objection is whoever controls what to ban / allow is given a lot of power, so how do we decide these things.

For people - I think it's fine to be intolerant individually, however our institutions should not be intolerant. For example I can hire a cleaner for my house and refuse certain people. However it should not be possible for a company to refuse certain people as cleaners. I'm not sure how to formalize this into a law though.

Physical or mental violence because of intolerance of people and ideas are bad because I don't want violence on me. However I am not certain how to define mental violence.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#183

Post by giveexamples »

anon20190221 wrote: post #155
zerez wrote: post #148

https://github.com/majestrate/bitchan This seems already close enough to what the author is proposing. Even the language choice is the same. Your project will still require the users to download a 3rd party software to run it, which I believe to be the main problem with the current approaches. Therefore I don't see anything new this is bringing to the table. It's no different than downloading and running the imageboa…

Yes, somewhat similar. Thanks for the link. The major difference here is that Pepe runs on a mix network similar to I2P, this helps hide your identity whereas anyone can see what you are doing with plain Bitcoin. To answer the question in your comment: yes, you can install and configure I2P, you can install iMule on top of it to exchange files and some distributed forum to post on. But the usability of all that is re…

I wonder if it's possible to implement this via WebRTC and javascript? This would make it compatible with everyone with a browser, without need to develop an application for every platform.

One stumbling block would be addressability without TURN.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#184

Post by aldonius »

hexadec wrote: post #47
drusepth wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What is fundamentally different with Pepe is moderation. Instead of relying on a centralized entity with a banhammer, each board and thread owner may anonymously moderate their spaces on their own. However, nothing can actually be deleted, it can only be shadowed, and each user decides whether they want to see the light or the full version of the page at any moment in time. People can still reply to shadowed posts i…

This begs the question, which is the default: light or full. You cannot claim to support freedom of speech and have this capacity in my opinion. It is implicitly saying some voices are less valid. It is an interesting project technically, but I do not think it will replace the *chan model for edgy people to be edgy on the internet. If your opinions are so extreme that you feel that you must be anonymous and free from…

So you're claiming that freedom of speech creates an obligation to listen?

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#185

Post by Krisjohn »

tone wrote: post #80
ThomW wrote: post #9

Parler is a shit hole, and at this point I’m not sure we need another social network anything. The major ones do a lousy job of policing fake news and misinformation, and from your tone it sounds like you support that garbage. I’m pretty sure giving every moron on earth a globally-accessible soapbox is about the stupidest idea humankind has ever had.

I'm not sure how anyone holds this opinion. Do you really believe that this will result in fair, unbiased reporting? Who is the long-term great arbiter not only of the news but removal of non-news? I'm also not sure why your worldview seems to be that given access to all opinions, the stupidest ones too, people will not and cannot learn to make informed judgements for themselves. You will see some stupidity but it's…

I'm not sure how anyone holds anything but this opinion. Put me down as another vote for "unwanted shit-hole".

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#186

Post by subsection1h »

tone wrote: post #80
ThomW wrote: post #9

Parler is a shit hole, and at this point I’m not sure we need another social network anything. The major ones do a lousy job of policing fake news and misinformation, and from your tone it sounds like you support that garbage. I’m pretty sure giving every moron on earth a globally-accessible soapbox is about the stupidest idea humankind has ever had.

I'm not sure how anyone holds this opinion. Do you really believe that this will result in fair, unbiased reporting? Who is the long-term great arbiter not only of the news but removal of non-news? I'm also not sure why your worldview seems to be that given access to all opinions, the stupidest ones too, people will not and cannot learn to make informed judgements for themselves. You will see some stupidity but it's…

38% of the white evangelical Protestants who responded to Pew Research Center's survey[1] said that humans have always existed in their present form. But maybe you're right; maybe these people just need more time to become informed. It's only been 160 years since On the Origin of Species was published. We need to be more patient.

[1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/11/darwin-day/

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#187

Post by drukenemo »

ThomW wrote: post #9

Parler is a shit hole, and at this point I’m not sure we need another social network anything. The major ones do a lousy job of policing fake news and misinformation, and from your tone it sounds like you support that garbage. I’m pretty sure giving every moron on earth a globally-accessible soapbox is about the stupidest idea humankind has ever had.

The first problem it pops-out when I read your comment is that you are sure your opinions represent the good and opinions that go against yours are objectively the evil. Censoring what is not what you want to express is thus virtuous. Imagine for a moment that this platform would be against calling for “censoring morons” and thus your comment banned.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#188

Post by [deleted] »

subsection1h wrote: post #186
tone wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure how anyone holds this opinion. Do you really believe that this will result in fair, unbiased reporting? Who is the long-term great arbiter not only of the news but removal of non-news? I'm also not sure why your worldview seems to be that given access to all opinions, the stupidest ones too, people will not and cannot learn to make informed judgements for themselves. You will see some stupidity but it's…

38% of the white evangelical Protestants who responded to Pew Research Center's survey[1] said that humans have always existed in their present form. But maybe you're right; maybe these people just need more time to become informed. It's only been 160 years since On the Origin of Species was published. We need to be more patient. [1] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/02/11/darwin-day/

[deleted]

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#189

Post by gchamonlive »

teh_klev wrote: post #142
gchamonlive wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tolerate intolerance to tolerance of gaybashing? That is just not being tolerant to intolerance. The question stands

> Tolerate intolerance to tolerance of gaybashing? Which explains why you should probably re-phrase. And also because not all societies on this planet are the same in terms of "tolerance".

> That is just not being tolerant to intolerance

This is what you meant. It fits in the question. You are just phrasing it differently and calling it fundamentally different, when it is just a rearrangement and expansion of words. You can do this indefinitely, but the meaning won't change.

Re: Frustrated with Parler deplatforming, I am building a service no one can silence

#190

Post by thu2111 »

anon20190221 wrote: post #93
makeworld wrote: post #2

Interesting. Have you heard of Aether though? It seems a lot simpler, but achieving the same result. It's a flood network, I believe. https://getaether.net/

Looks interesting. Unfortunately, flooding does not scale, its cost is O(n²) where n is the number of participants. The saddest part is that if they were to switch to a less bandwidth-crippling scheme (such as GossipSub), that would destroy the whole purpose because malicious agents can start soliciting messages, and given there is no premix layer on top, time to reveal your identity is going to start approaching zer…

That scaling argument assumes everyone pays the global network cost per node, which isn't true. Gossip scales because the cost to each participant is O(connections to my node), not O(connections in the whole network), and it's the per-participant cost that gets paid.
Post reply on HN