Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support • Hacker News Board

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#601

Post by travisoneill1 » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:25 PM UTC

munificent wrote: post #310

mozillalives wrote: post #44

All I’m going to say is that I’m all for free speech and setting fair rules for everyone to play by (ie regulation), but looking at the examples provided in the buzzfeed articles this is beyond simple free speech. I hear a lot of people saying this is just another example of the left trying to shut down free speech but there are clear threats being made on the platform. If Parler doesn’t want to do any content regula…

> I hear a lot of people saying this is just another example of the left trying to shut down free speech This is a specious argument on its face. The First Amendment does not say that private companies are obligated to spend money broadcasting someone else's speech. Hosting and serving isn't free and any private company has the freedom to decide what not to host. If an author's content is so toxic that advertisers wo…

But since this action appears coordinated across major platforms and likely in response to political pressure from the now in power Democratic party (Amazon is being paid for hosting, so no advertisers fleeing issue), I think there now may be a real first amendment issue.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#602

Post by rrose » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:25 PM UTC

larrywright wrote: post #528

Daishiman wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, parlor wasn't even doing a "good enough job". It wasn't doing _anything_. It's financial backers supported everything with regards to its users going into a violent frenzy. There really is nothing contentious here, unless you feel that if you know that a group is organizing in your platform with the intent of staging a coup then you're in your right to just let them go about it.

There are lots of horrible things on Parler from what I’ve seen (I don’t have an account, I’ve just seen screen shots). The most egregious example was the post from Trump attorney Lin Wood calling for Pence to be executed by firing squad. It was up for days, and only taken down when this all blew up.

and i think a key point about this particular example is that Lin Wood is a very visible public figure. This wasn't a single crazy comment buried in a long thread that a moderator could have missed. If there was any good-faith effort by Parler to moderate content, it would have caught the Lin Wood rant.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#603

Post by chickenpotpie » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:26 PM UTC

krrrh wrote: post #334

ketamine__ wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parler had the option to police their users but put an unqualified volunteer moderation team in charge. As you can imagine this leads to suboptimal results where the most egregious content isn't removed. I was on last night and saw a picture of Peloi's house with the address attached. These are dangerous people that are stalking our democratically elected leaders.

> unqualified volunteer moderation team in charge Devils advocate here, but this does for the most part work for Reddit.

Reddit also has employees that ban subreddits that aren’t effectively moderated

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#604

Post by hinkley » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:27 PM UTC

mcguire wrote: post #600

hinkley wrote: post #587

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The result of doing nothing is that in 15 years, the US becomes Germany, pre-WW2. You can think of it as vendors getting 'canceled' for progressively less severe offenses. Or. You can think of it as people waking up to offenses that have been allowed to go unchallenged for way too fucking long. People 'waking up' or no longer keeping their heads down being the result of the current administration transitioning to a L…

Clearly, vendors should be made to continue doing business with (some appropriately chosen set of?) clients, because that would be different than post-1933 intrawar Germany...how?

By 'result of doing nothing' I mean vendors turning a blind eye to their clients, instead of dumping them on the side of the road without even the courtesy of slowing the car down first.

I would have thought that was pretty clear from context.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#605

Post by travisoneill1 » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:27 PM UTC

emtel wrote: post #385

munificent wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I hear a lot of people saying this is just another example of the left trying to shut down free speech This is a specious argument on its face. The First Amendment does not say that private companies are obligated to spend money broadcasting someone else's speech. Hosting and serving isn't free and any private company has the freedom to decide what not to host. If an author's content is so toxic that advertisers wo…

Free speech and the First Amendment are not the same thing. Free speech is a moral principle/ideal that exists independently of the US Constitution. The First Amendment guarantees a certain form of free speech in the United States. Private-sector censorship / restriction of speech is not in violation of the First Amendment. However, it may still amount to a restriction on free speech.

When the government is threatening regulation against the private-sector because these companies don't censor, then I think this could potentially be considered a 1st amendment issue.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#606

Post by crististm » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:27 PM UTC

zmb_ wrote: post #321

I'm struggling to try to understand what this means for the risks of running a business in the cloud going forward. It was not just AWS dropping them, but many of their other vendors dropped them too, essentially killing their business overnight. Granted, for this first case the bar was extremely high. You needed literal storming of the Capitol and a platform seemingly specifically targeted at those people for this t…

Taken from The Book: "don't lend money to someone more powerful than you!". I would say this is a business failure. They should have prepared for that and they did not.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#607

Post by names_are_hard » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:28 PM UTC

Johnny555 wrote: post #413

Closi wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agree - but I think this can only be solved via legislation. Amazon has too much market power if it can shut down another company at the push of a button for something that isn't illegal (even if it's distasteful).

Was the parler content legal? "Amazon Web Services suspended Parler from its web hosting services... citing a letter it had obtained that mentions 98 examples of Parler posts that "encourage and incite violence." Don't forget that Amazon also has legal liability for hosting and distributing illegal content. Amazon is not a monopoly -- the mitigation for AWS being able to cut off your business is to architect your app…

I don't know how the law currently works, but it seems reasonable to me that it should be the responsibility of the government to determine what's legal and what's not. I think Amazon would not be acting improperly if they alerted law enforcement that they suspect illegal activity and then waited for the authorities to issue an official order to take down the content (presumably based on a court order). I get that the current ToS allows Amazon to terminate the relationship unilaterally, but I don't think Amazon has to do that morally. And if they have to do that legally, I think it's fair to ask that the law be changed to allow private organizations selling a platform to not have to determine the legality of the actions of their customers. The FBI, police, and courts can do that.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#608

Post by jessaustin » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:28 PM UTC

pixl97 wrote: post #525

ekianjo wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't attempt to overturn a fair democratic election and install an illegitimate government. Erm, was Parler as a platform even doing that? Or you know, PEOPLE on the platform, which is not the exact same thing?

Turns out you should keep those attempting to over throw democratic elections off your service.

Ouch, that's going to hurt. USA government is a pretty big customer. Or do we not care about democratic elections in Venezuela, Bolivia, Brazil, Egypt, etc.?

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#609

Post by ThrowItAway2Day » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:28 PM UTC

legutierr wrote: post #440

chmod600 wrote: post #425

This is a weird case of private companies getting together and voluntarily enforcing the supremecy of the state. I'm sure it's happened before, but probably not in situations we'd like to emulate. Insurrection is bad, but the possibility of insurrection is good. When any possibility of insurrection is crushed, for everyone now and in the future (not just insurrectionists), that sounds like it won't end well for the p…

It happens all the time in the banking arena. Banks are frequently used to deny market access to businesses that are undesirable to the federal government but are otherwise legal businesses.

And why sketchier businesses, such as casinos, had to turn to organized crime for loans and funding.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#610

Post by mcguire » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 8:29 PM UTC

jlkuester7 wrote: post #536

lokar wrote: post #513

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parlor did not have a real, honest, effort at moderation. It was done poorly, and seems to have been just a fig leaf to say they were doing it. Objectively it was not working. Way way way worse than anything on FB or Twitter.

It seems likely that this is true. But couldn't you get to the same end-result by having good intentions but a bad moderation system? (e.g. I want to keep Nazi content off my service so I subject all posts to a review by 5 other users. That might work until you get a bunch of Nazis that suddenly sign up up-vote each other's content). Not every new service can afford to moderate things like "FB or Twitter". And this i…

I would bet that any legal standard would involve phrases like "good faith attempt" and "standard of practice". (If you find a circle of Nazis up-voting each other, you'll have to think up a new moderation scheme.)

FaceBook and Twitter are decent examples---their moderation systems are pretty hit-or-miss, assuming good faith.