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

Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

courtlistener.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 485 posts

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#271

Post by nip180 »

modernpacifist wrote: post #176

In seeing all of these complaints about the cloud providers getting too big, owning the internet etc, have folks forgotten how to run their own equipment or what renting a dedicated server is? The internet did function prior to cloud computing existing and surprise, running a rack full of NUCs can give you a lot of capacity to run a glorified message board.

Let’s be clear, access to cloud computing companies like AWS is a competitive advantage because it requires less upfront capital and less engineering time to manage. I can 100% see why Parler would prefer having access to AWS compared to running their own hardware.

Ianal, so I can’t judge the merits of this legal case. To be honest I’m surprised Parler can find lawyers willing to bring it to court on their behalf, or banks willing to process transactions to pay said lawyers.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#272

Post by DataWorker »

Nacdor wrote: post #220
tbenst wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is almost certainly false. For example, see the arrest of the leader of the Proud Boys (for events prior to Capitol, but played active role on Parler encouraging proud boys violence that day): https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/several-well-know...

The story does confirm he wasn't there though, not sure if he had been released by then: > Tarrio does not appear to have been present during the insurrection.

And if he was arrested prior that indicates some awareness in advance of what might have unfolded. I’m probably alone in the opinion that it shouldn’t have been given the go ahead, especially amidst a pandemic. Protests seem unreasonably dangerous in today’s world.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#273

Post by jamie_ca »

meekrohprocess wrote: post #132
axlee wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US government should also move to immediately outlaw targeted algorithmic advertising, which would make a huge impact on Big Tech's sectarian violence cashcow. That is an interesting proposition, but I wonder what would fill the void created. I believe advertising does not increase consumption per-se, but that it redistributes it among a different set of product and services, so who would be the winners and los…

What's wrong with targeting ads based on subject matter? TV channels and magazines know how this works. If the page is about fashion, sell ad space to clothing companies. If the page is about travel, sell it to hospitality companies and tourism boards. If the page is about politics or finance, sell it to people making catheters and stair lifts. It's much less creepy than trying to spy on everybody who reads the page,…

Ads based on the subject matter isn't the problem. "Targeted algorithmic advertising" in this context is building a profile of the viewer, and running ads based on that profile.

At its simplest, it's the ad network deciding that you were recently seen visting toyota.com, so it'll show you 4 ads over the next hour for Toyota vehicles, to help cement that association. At its worst, it builds up an individualized profile over the course of months from thousands of websites (with google ads everywhere, you bet!) and allow advertisers to practically target viewers based on a psych profile.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#274

Post by nullc »

rmah wrote: post #238
nullc wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, Parler perjured themselves in the linked complaint when they stated that every example cited by amazon was removed?

It appears so. Is this surprising?

Did they also perjure themselves when they stated the Amazon letter was published in buzzfeed before being provided to them?

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#275

Post by acdha »

dcolkitt wrote: post #154
listless wrote: post #34

If you’re a business, do you really want to be on a provider that can pull your card with little to no notice? That’s a lot of power. The boot is coming down hard right now. The cloud is looking like a risky bet.

It seems like there's at the very least a product-market fit for a cloud provider with less nebulous TOS. From the wording of the AWS contract, it sounds like the language is loose enough that any user can pretty much be terminated at whim. If/when this lawsuit gets publicity, my guess is a lot of C-suite executives are gonna be looking over their shoulders and evaluating how screwed they'd be if their current cloud…

> If/when this lawsuit gets publicity, my guess is a lot of C-suite executives are gonna be looking over their shoulders and evaluating how screwed they'd be if their current cloud provider decided to deplatform them.

Do you really think there are “a lot” of companies which host user content, refuse to moderate it, and refuse to deal with complaints forwarded by their service provider? Most C-level people are going to look at this and say “that's why we follow our contracts” or “I'm glad we don't have to worry about legal action against a rogue customer potentially impacting any infrastructure we share with them”.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#276

Post by atypicaluser »

meekmockmook wrote: post #17

I have seen so many violent threats and incitements on Twitter, Snapchat, Facebook, and Instagram over the last 5 years that Parler could possibly make the case that they've been singled out, but I doubt it. They're just too unsympathetic of a plaintiff, imho. That said, antitrust battles against Big Tech will dominate the next four years of economic policy, and rightfully so. GAFA is too big, too powerful, too manip…

> They're [Parler] just too unsympathetic of a plaintiff, imho.

I don't know that sympathy has anything to do with the merits of their case.[1][2]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/jun/27/aclu-assist-kkk-...

*edit--formatting

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#277

Post by revlolz »

gt565k wrote: post #78

How does stuff like this work in Germany, as I believe they have a lot of anti nazi laws against hate speech etc? Like this should would have been shut down weeks in advance in Germany. Have we learned nothing from history? I can't believe people are fighting to give racists, mentally ill, brainwashed extremists a platform to organize and plot violent acts behind the disguise of free speech.

I have one question for you. At what point do you begin to question your ideology for it's intolerance, double standards, and moral inconsistencies? Have YOU learned nothing from history, ironically Hitler's rise to power, to even question the dogma being fed to you regarding racism and violence? I'm not saying you have to tolerate or even agree with your opposition. However, I'd challenge you to not partake in the past dictator's favorite action of belittling and scapegoating his political opposition. You are contributing to the very acts you espouse to be against by labeling all of your opposition as racists, mentally ill, brainwashed extremists. All you've demonstrated with your words is violence is okay, so long as you agree with the cause as we experienced COUNTLESS acts of violence in the US riots occurring throughout the year.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#278

Post by meekmockmook »

CyanLite2 wrote: post #256
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many protesters arrested in the 2020 Summer protests had a twitter account?

There's a big difference between protesting and domestic terrorism.

Tell that to my favorite ice cream shop that was smashed to bits on Melrose. Or the synagogues on Fairfax that were defiled. Or the vehicles all over DTLA that were set on fire. Or the man who died of smoke inhalation in a Minneapolis shop because he couldn't escape the flames.

At least 19 people died last summer. Don't downplay it.

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#279

Post by jakelazaroff »

caminocorner wrote: post #260
jakelazaroff wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Glenn is either terrible at research or lying. https://twitter.com/azforeman/status/1348648808390008832?s=2... Google “baked alaska parler”. It’s literally on the first page of results.

Thanks for the image. Do you know if the account was active or unused? I guess that's why Glenn said "were active users" and not "were users".

Hard to tell now that it’s down. But I find it pretty hard to trust him on this. One, it’s been fairly well documented that people were organizing the attack on Parler [1]. And two, as I mentioned elsewhere in the thread, there’s the obvious loophole that many who participated in the attack simply haven’t been arrested at all.

[1] https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2021/01/08/far-right-ins...

Re: Parler LLC vs. Amazon Web Services Inc

#280

Post by ABeeSea »

Natsu wrote: post #193
mhh__ wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really scared to trust Greenwald on anything political at the moment. For a start, the silencing competitors argument doesn't really work with AWS because they just do hosting.

> For a start, the silencing competitors argument doesn't really work with AWS because they just do hosting. The complaint alleges there are deeper ties: Less than a month ago, AWS announced with a press release a new multi-year deal with Twitter. AWS will “provide global cloud infrastructure to deliver Twitter timelines.” Twitter Selects AWS as Strategic Provider to Serve Timelines, Press Center, Amazon, (Dec. 15, 2…

They also signed a multi-year deal with Pinterest which is a competitor to twitter. So that argument won’t get very far.
Post reply on HN