461–470 of 1001 posts
Any platform that accepts user generated content can potentially end up in this situation. Amazon appears to be setting a precedent here that any platform that has not fully solved content moderation at scale risks being kicked of AWS.
It opens the door to what is effectively a DDoS; outpace moderation capability, get the site kicked off Amazon.
Where 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…
AWS is screwing itself. No one will every trust AWS ever again. Why would any legitimate business use AWS ever again? Amazon doesn't like your product, they will shut off your site. This is the fucking end of cloud computing.
If people on an app continually call for violence and violate your TOS you can boot them off. Especially if the app in question has no good faith moderation of content to meet your terms of service and their terms of service are either lacking or wink wink levels of enforcement. You can have ANY political perspective you want! Lower taxes, raise taxes, immigration policy, school choice, charter schools WHATEVER! You…
These sites all get eliminated when they are tied to a violent attack.
You can't really blame them, but I do wonder whether a private company ought to have so much power. Some speech (that presents a CLEAR and imminent danger) should absolutely be regulated--but as platforms grow the levers for enforcement shift increasingly from the government to corporations, and I'm convinced that that isn't a good thing.
If they have not violated any laws, then that speech is legal and should be allowed to stay up. Right now there is a weird middle ground where nobody is directly prosecuted but they do face consequences in the form of de-platforming. But if someone is so dangerous that they do not deserve a platform, then the right answer is obviously not to take away their Twitter privileges, but to place them in jail where they cannot continue to cause more harm. If they are not deemed harmful enough to jail, then de-platforming them is (they argue) unfair.
If people on an app continually call for violence and violate your TOS you can boot them off. Especially if the app in question has no good faith moderation of content to meet your terms of service and their terms of service are either lacking or wink wink levels of enforcement. You can have ANY political perspective you want! Lower taxes, raise taxes, immigration policy, school choice, charter schools WHATEVER! You…
Edit: Thanks for correcting my ignorance.
Make your own social media service, they said. Where does this end? What's the endgame?
It was only two hours ago when I wrote: "I'm curious if this will also escalate to low-level platforms (will hosting companies, registrars, or even ISPs start taking similar actions on a regular basis?)" when Apple removed the app, following Google Play from yesterday. It would seem this cycle is certainly not done perpetuating itself as of yet. I think we are going to have some rough times ahead of us unfortunately.…