For a company trying to avoid censorship, they are hard to contact. I have been trying since yesterday to contact them about others they could use.
Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
351–360 of 1001 posts
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#352Lets consider this possibility: if there was systemic voter fraud [1] then this is again another action done to supress the information and prevent from more people learning about the possible voter fraud. Not only are social media platforms supressing voices, there is also the media which has the option to decide what to cover and what not to. These are the primary ways people stay informed. Note: not an American. […
Man, that site has pretty flimsy "evidence". Many of them are just links to news articles where people assert things. A news article from someone claiming between 120K to 305K votes might be faked is presented on the site as "expert witness" as a source for the "evidence" that "300K votes were faked"...
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#353The short term calculus seems pretty clear: if a service is unable to moderate conversations that are inciting and planning imminent violence that undermines the fabric of democratic society (aka inauguration or the disruption of the transfer of power over the next 12 days), its better to shut it off than keep it around in case that violence comes to pass. Precautionary principle applies and a circuit breaker goes of…
> Precautionary principle
5 people are dead from the Parler-coordinated attack on the US Capitol. It's post-cautionary principle now.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#354Where do we draw the line on how we censor the internet? Obviously actual terrorist group sites can and should be taken down, but this feels like it's getting more murky than that. - Should we be okay with Facebook censoring these groups? - Should we be okay with Google censoring search results? - Should we be okay with Apple censoring apps? - Should we be okay with AWS censoring websites? - Should we be okay with Go…
I’m drawing two lines. One is property rights. For each of your questions, is the person doing the “censoring” the owner of the product? If yes, then I’m morally fine with it. The second line, does the censoring make the product unusable to me? If yes, then I will stop using it.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#355Nice website you got there. It would be a shame if some anonymous trolls posted more illegal content than your moderators could handle, and forced you off of every platform. You're in luck, we provide an online troll protection service. For a monthly fee, we'll make sure that trolls don't bother you.
Would be a shame if the Parler CEO literally refused to moderate his platform even when warned of the consequences multiple times.
Nooo! Amazon HAS to let me use their business! The first amendment says so!!!!!
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#356Where do we draw the line on how we censor the internet? Obviously actual terrorist group sites can and should be taken down, but this feels like it's getting more murky than that. - Should we be okay with Facebook censoring these groups? - Should we be okay with Google censoring search results? - Should we be okay with Apple censoring apps? - Should we be okay with AWS censoring websites? - Should we be okay with Go…
> Where do we draw the line on how we censor the internet?
If they are a private company and not a utility with a government granted monopoly then they can do what they want. So not okay for Verizon or the power company, but everyone else should be free to censor. It's their private property.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#357The short term calculus seems pretty clear: if a service is unable to moderate conversations that are inciting and planning imminent violence that undermines the fabric of democratic society (aka inauguration or the disruption of the transfer of power over the next 12 days), its better to shut it off than keep it around in case that violence comes to pass. Precautionary principle applies and a circuit breaker goes of…
Apple is demanding that Parler be held responsible for the content posted by its users OR it will take it off iOS.
So basically Apple is demanding that Parler waive its section 230 protections while lobbying to maintain its own 230 privileges.
https://twitter.com/willchamberlain/status/13477362322567987...
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#358Make your own social media service, they said. Where does this end? What's the endgame?
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#359A tale as old as HN itself: a service enforces its own Terms of Service, and commenters fall over themselves to defend an absurd absolutist ideal of "free speech" even when it directly leads to a violent mob committing sedition against the United States.
Spare us, please. Reconcile your ideals with what's in front of you today before insisting that we need to live up to those ideals.
Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler
#360you're going to see companies go back to bare metal and fiber where they peer their network with the internet and existence isn't determined by the outrage of the day and the whims of a platform provider.
the angry mob will then go after the networks doing the peering. it's chilling to me the speed at which the censorship is happening and the speed at which the 'outrage' shifts.