241–250 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about calling for the eradication of Jews? https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1003332853525110784 Twitter doesn't seem to have any issue with this content
or the fact that nicolas maduro - a man already convicted of crimes against humanity by the UN - still has an account and has gone uncensored. how anyone here defends such blatant hypocrisy is beyond me
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't allow companies like Perler to signup. What Perler used AWS for is prohibited by the TOS and AUP that Perler agreed to. It just took a while for AWS to notice and enforce the legal agreement that Perler agreed to abide by. Perler lied right from the beginning (because they had no intention of abiding by their agreement) to get AWS to provide service they would never have provided had Perler been honest fro…
Colorado lost the cake lawsuit. If anything that makes my claim stronger.
But not much (though not doing much to make it stronger is still not making it weaker), because it didn’t lose it on the kinds of grounds people on either side wanted the case decided on for a decisive win, but because based on the details of the proceedings in his case the Court found specific animus against Phillips’ religious views in the handling of the particular case by State officials.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the only way to get 'badged' is to use the mobile app and take a picture of govt ID (driver license, passport, etc). Some people have argued, based on this, that Parler was set up by the NSA to get data on people. Hoovering up data from social media is certainly the sort of thing the NSA would do.
This suggestion doesn't stand up to a moment's scrutiny. Do you really think the best way for a government agency to access government IDs is to secretly run a Twitter clone?
The best method for target acquisition, sure. If someone is so perturbed by their reality being rejected by the mainstream that they're willing to sign up for an alternative to maintain their worldview, then running that alternative would be a fantastic way to identify people at risk of radicalization, domestic terror risks, etc.
And if we're being clear, the USIC has run companies with this explicit mission in the past. In fact, running a company to provide one service at face level while providing a different service to the IC underneath is the mode that yielded some of the biggest intelligence wins in Western history. See Crypto AG.
That said, no reason to run it themselves; they're well aware that someone else will end up running it for them, and with security nowhere near front-of-mind for any startup, they can just pick up the key from underneath the doormat and take the farm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At some point this becomes about what is right for society versus what you can legally get away with and what you feel like doing because you can. Is this, legally, a free speech issue on its own? No, and I support Amazon’s right to “nope” out of anything they want. But in the current context of the rush to also prevent open Trump support in other areas like payment processing, and the way the media is hellbent on tr…
The worst part about the giddy, gleeful way in which they are shutting down these echo chamber apps is the complete lack of thought as to how this impacts and further radicalizes the users. I have a brother who is into Qanon and Alex Jones. All of this just feeds into and cements the narrative, and pushes him into alternative platforms where he is even less likely to hear or see more mainstream view points. It litera…
A great point. I have yet to hear any response at all to this problem from the pro-censorship camp, much less a convincing one.
Every attempt to solve the problem creates more problems.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The first amendment protects you from the government: you can't be prosecuted for things you say (then there are some case-law carve outs for inciting violence, etc). The first amendment does not prevent businesses from terminating a relationship. edit: my opinions are my views and dont represent anyone elses
The 14th amendment overrides the 1st in this case. You CAN be prosecuted for providing aid or comfort to an insurrection, even just verbal support (or, providing hosting services.)
based (presumably, but I'm not a constitutional scholar) on the 14th amendment's section 3:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
Parler wasn't some innocent social media site that happened to have some disgusting content on it. The disgusting content was literally its reason for existing, despite all of the bland "we're just a free speech site" stuff. And I have yet to hear anyone discuss how "anything goes" and social media do not mix. It's much easier to turn a community toxic than it is to keep it healthy, and healthy communities (of any so…
Who's next? Telegram?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Colorado lost the cake lawsuit. If anything that makes my claim stronger.
> Colorado lost the cake lawsuit. If anything that makes my claim stronger. But not much (though not doing much to make it stronger is still not making it weaker), because it didn’t lose it on the kinds of grounds people on either side wanted the case decided on for a decisive win, but because based on the details of the proceedings in his case the Court found specific animus against Phillips’ religious views in the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the only way to get 'badged' is to use the mobile app and take a picture of govt ID (driver license, passport, etc). Some people have argued, based on this, that Parler was set up by the NSA to get data on people. Hoovering up data from social media is certainly the sort of thing the NSA would do.
This suggestion doesn't stand up to a moment's scrutiny. Do you really think the best way for a government agency to access government IDs is to secretly run a Twitter clone?
Parler wasn't some innocent social media site that happened to have some disgusting content on it. The disgusting content was literally its reason for existing, despite all of the bland "we're just a free speech site" stuff. And I have yet to hear anyone discuss how "anything goes" and social media do not mix. It's much easier to turn a community toxic than it is to keep it healthy, and healthy communities (of any so…
Free Speech is such a disgusting thing we should never allow low IQ people to exist. Is that what you are saying ?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't see a difference between what was occurring on Parler vs the New York Times writing an op-ed? You're intentionally conflating reasonable discourse vs facilitating a violent mob. Do I agree with that particular NY Times op-ed? No, but publishing is a reasonable way to share your views in a way Parler was literally being used to coordinate an attack on US politicians that has lead to the death of 5 people. We…
> conflating reasonable discourse... This is precisely my point! Who gets to decide what's reasonable discourse? I personally don't think the whole rank and file of establishment press jumping over each other to get in line behind the US state and starting two truly godawful wars is reasonable. If I was in charge of distributing news to people in the early 2000s, I'd have simply disallowed all of it and made sure peo…
If it escalates to violence it's not reasonable, that's it. It gets muddy around state sponsored violence but the assumption is that we already have controls around that. I think that's a reasonable line to draw. If I go on Twitter and make specific threats to other users I believe that Twitter is within reason to prevent me from using their platform.
> I hate these idiots. Most reasonable people do. They're dangerous (not as dangerous as the US military, but I still wouldn't cross them). My objection is to the structural/cultural development of a tiny handful of companies amassing for themselves a huge cultural and epistemological power. They're increasingly able to shape reality in ways 20th century culture industry couldn't even dream of.
I agree with most of what you're saying. We as a society have handed over what I believe to be the vast majority of our day to day communication to a handful of companies that have no motive in mind other than profit. Social media has been shaping our society for the worse in way less overt ways for the last 15 years by driving eyeballs to controversial posts/topics to keep up engagement.
I'm not pretending to have the answers, what I'm trying to point out is the phenomenon of big companies avoiding hosting questionable content is not new. What is new is the ubiquity of social media in our lives and politics.
I think we're better without it personally.