AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
e.customeriomail.com
AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
1–10 of 96 posts
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#2Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit.
That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#3Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit. That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
There are two things that can be true at the same time:
- Amazon was within its legal and ethical rights to do this, and ought to win any court cases, etc.
- The aggregate situation of de-platforming of individuals and entire platforms from the Internet by a few unilateral decisions by corporations reveals a power structure we ought to not want (it has always been there, but now it's undeniably shown itself willing and able to exercise its power when needed) since it will inevitably be abused given incentives and the lack of checks and balances on it.
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#4Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit. That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
If my “editorialized” you mean “edited,” yes. But it’s not opinionated, it’s stated as fact in the filing with specific details backing it up.
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#5Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit. That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
I'm not totally sure what to think, but aren't many violent acts planned on Facebook and Twitter? Wasn't the insurrection at the capitol? Yet, the big boys aren't paying the price, it's the competitor that suddenly got popular that wasn't able to be influenced by politicos.
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#6Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit. That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
There are two things that can be true at the same time: - Amazon was within its legal and ethical rights to do this, and ought to win any court cases, etc. - The aggregate situation of de-platforming of individuals and entire platforms from the Internet by a few unilateral decisions by corporations reveals a power structure we ought to not want (it has always been there, but now it's undeniably shown itself willing a…
Is there a feasible plan to obtain better power structures in the same time scales that these people are literally plotting to overthrow governments, murder political opponents, etc.?
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#7Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit. That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
There are two things that can be true at the same time: - Amazon was within its legal and ethical rights to do this, and ought to win any court cases, etc. - The aggregate situation of de-platforming of individuals and entire platforms from the Internet by a few unilateral decisions by corporations reveals a power structure we ought to not want (it has always been there, but now it's undeniably shown itself willing a…
The check and balance is working just fine in this case. Parler kept allowing people to post death threats, they didn't remove it because that's the entire reason their platform exists, and AWS enforced their TOS and stopped hosting them. They're free to go elsewhere.
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#8Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit. That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
I'm not totally sure what to think, but aren't many violent acts planned on Facebook and Twitter? Wasn't the insurrection at the capitol? Yet, the big boys aren't paying the price, it's the competitor that suddenly got popular that wasn't able to be influenced by politicos.
> it's the competitor that suddenly got popular.
You're omitting a key detail. This competitor was getting popular specifically because of their promise not to remove such violent content, while Facebook and Twitter were steadily ramping up efforts to remove it from their platforms.
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#9This is why we can't have nice things.
Not sure why people insist on posting comments like those identified. If you were publicly identified as making those comments, you would definitely be at risk of losing friends/jobs etc.
But that said, Parler isn't alone in their issue with inappropriate comments.
Re: AWS repeatedly warned Parler about posts urging murder
#10Editorialized title. Link is to the response Amazon filed yesterday to Parler's law suit. That said, yeah. I don't know why people are screaming so hard about censorship when the simple truth is that this was an attempt to retroactively apply moderation to a community that had verifiably gotten out of control, at a moment where it was clear that many of these threats were real and not just rhetoric.
I'm not totally sure what to think, but aren't many violent acts planned on Facebook and Twitter? Wasn't the insurrection at the capitol? Yet, the big boys aren't paying the price, it's the competitor that suddenly got popular that wasn't able to be influenced by politicos.
The difference: FB is alerted to those posts, they (eventually) take them down / close the communities. Parler was straight up telling AWS to piss off.