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

70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

cybernews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

641–650 of 1001 posts

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#641

Post by joshstrange »

sdenton4 wrote: post #479
liminal wrote: post #420

I see a number of people here describing Parler as "unmoderated", but it turns out they do have extensive moderation [1] that they use to ensure ideological conformity in their posts. Then the most active users were paid for their content too [2]. This really makes it more of a propaganda weapon than a free speech platform. [1] https://twitter.com/donk_enby/status/1347939939120533506 [2] https://twitter.com/donk_enby…

This really is the rule, not the exception. Every time I've deigned to wade into conservative "free-speech" zones I've been booted out for ideological nonconformity. Tolerance is a peace treaty: https://extranewsfeed.com/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-precept-1...

Agreed, the irony of /r/conservative complaining about censorship or their rights to free speech being restricted while making submitting posts and commenting "flaired users only" (AKA only the users who agree with us and think the same way) is completely lost on them...

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#642

Post by liminal »

sdenton4 wrote: post #479
liminal wrote: post #420

I see a number of people here describing Parler as "unmoderated", but it turns out they do have extensive moderation [1] that they use to ensure ideological conformity in their posts. Then the most active users were paid for their content too [2]. This really makes it more of a propaganda weapon than a free speech platform. [1] https://twitter.com/donk_enby/status/1347939939120533506 [2] https://twitter.com/donk_enby…

This really is the rule, not the exception. Every time I've deigned to wade into conservative "free-speech" zones I've been booted out for ideological nonconformity. Tolerance is a peace treaty: https://extranewsfeed.com/tolerance-is-not-a-moral-precept-1...

FWIW I've found that true on the left as well

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#643

Post by syops »

whimsicalism wrote: post #611
syops wrote: post #521

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven't given any evidence that Instagram enforces only one viewpoint. And I'd be shocked if Instagram only pays for political posts from one side of the debate in American politics. That Instagram seeks to counter what it perceives of as false political claims has been convincingly made. That it does so to advance only one certain political agenda has not been made.

My evidence was attempting to show that "claims Instagram thinks are true" is an explicitly political category. By moderating away political claims that diverge from that category, IG is advancing a political agenda. You're asking me to prove the much harder claim that IG has never taken moderation action against political beliefs on the other side of the political spectrum. Of course, that is a. an extremely hard cl…

From my perspective the proper response to OP is to either

1. point out how the claims made about Parler are false.

2. point out that this is done by other large social media websites and thus Parler should not be singled out.

Keep in mind that by "this" in 2 I mean specifically that there are large social media sites that are designed specifically to enforce a certain political viewpoint. As I see it neither of these were done by you.

I think though that we will not agree on these points and I accept that. Thank you for the engagement. I will read and consider any response you have and leave the discussion at that.

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#644

Post by chipotle_coyote »

jimcsharp wrote: post #604
NikolaeVarius wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes? I wouldn't work for Parler, but I fail to see how the phrase "free speech social network" should elicit some negative emotion. Parler sucks because they are a haven to right wing extremists, not because of their marketing. Its like being angry at Signal because their encryption allows terrorists communicate securely.

Everywhere I go, I feel like I have free speech by default. I suppose it's my privilege that I feel like that, but I digress. When free speech is explicitly advertised, it smells.

Yes, this, exactly. It's sad that "free speech" currently feels like a dog whistle for the alt right, but it's disingenuous to ignore the reality that social media sites and forums that have sprung up in the last few years explicitly advertising this have very much been going after an explicitly far right audience. The explicit promise is "we won't suppress your speech like those other platforms do," but Twitter, Facebook, et. al., demonstrably suppress very little speech: there are high-profile cases of people who have been kicked off after repeated warnings, but that's not actually the same claim. The real promise of Parler and friends is "you'll be surrounded by people who agree with you, unlike those other platforms."

(There are lots of anecdotes of individual users who get temporary bans on Twitter for political speech, but I have heard those anecdotes across the political spectrum. I suspect conservatives grumpy at Twitter would be very surprised how much left-wing discourse there is about how Twitter protects TERFs, how they pay lip service to banning Nazis but don't really do it, how Jack Dorsey is probably a crypto-fascist, and so on. The parallel -- "I know of people who agree with me who have been moderated and people who disagree with me who have not, ergo Twitter is obviously biased in favor of The Other Side" -- is kind of fascinating.)

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#645

Post by josh_frome »

mxcrossb wrote: post #137
x86_64Ubuntu wrote: post #74

I've always been amazed at how hackers can exfiltrate so much data with no one even batting an eye. Doing the math, the pure data cost to Parler was $7,700 (($0.15/GB 10) + ($0.11/GB 40) + ($0.09/GB 20)) 1000 => $7,700 https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-data-transfer-prices-re... Even the Chase Bank hack had an astronomical amount of data that didn't appear to set off any alarms.

Of course, being unaware of how much you’re being charged is par for the course with AWS!

Best they can do is eventual consistency for billing, apparently.

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#646

Post by lern_too_spel »

cbozeman wrote: post #633
lern_too_spel wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter had a policy against misgendering and had locked her out of her account several times before banning her. If this is something Meghan thinks is worth getting banned over, that's on her. Most people just don't care what pronoun somebody wants to be called, so the non-asshole thing to do is to just use their preferred pronoun.

> so the non-asshole thing to do is to just use their preferred pronoun. I agree. I completely agree. I myself call the transgender people in my life by their preferred pronoun. I also find compelling someone's speech by threat of banning them to be disgusting. Especially when there's a block button available. If you don't like what someone's saying, you can literally ignore everything they say. Herein lies the conun…

Blocking does not scale if you interact with a lot of people (see many famous examples of celebrities quitting Twitter over harrassment), which is something Twitter would obviously want its users to do. To make it easier, it makes absolute sense to me for Twitter to enforce clearly defined civility rules.

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#647

Post by joshuamorton »

cbozeman wrote: post #633
lern_too_spel wrote: post #588

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twitter had a policy against misgendering and had locked her out of her account several times before banning her. If this is something Meghan thinks is worth getting banned over, that's on her. Most people just don't care what pronoun somebody wants to be called, so the non-asshole thing to do is to just use their preferred pronoun.

> so the non-asshole thing to do is to just use their preferred pronoun. I agree. I completely agree. I myself call the transgender people in my life by their preferred pronoun. I also find compelling someone's speech by threat of banning them to be disgusting. Especially when there's a block button available. If you don't like what someone's saying, you can literally ignore everything they say. Herein lies the conun…

Her speech was not compelled. She was removed from twitter. She wasn't unpersoned. She isn't in a gulag. Stop hyperbolizing and your concerns get a lot less concerning.

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#648

Post by awb »

julianmarq wrote: post #598
awb wrote: post #590

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> increasingly pro-censorship[1] lately The US has always had limits on free speech. > Freedom of speech and expression, therefore, may not be recognized as being absolute, and common limitations or boundaries to freedom of speech relate to libel, slander, obscenity, pornography, sedition, incitement, fighting words, classified information, copyright violation, trade secrets, food labeling, non-disclosure agreements,…

> [US limits on free speech] seem to be relevant to this discussion. But not to my comment, and not just because I'm not from the USA. I'm not speaking in favor of parler if that's what you assumed (for some reason). Specially if it is, like the top comment said, just a propaganda machine trying to enforce a single viewpoint. That's antithesis to free speech.

I was referring to the comment where you say HN is “bizarrely” more “pro-censorship”.

Where you see “pro-censorship”, many see speech that historically has never been protected in the US like calls to violence, or speech that insights others to violence.

Companies gave Trump et. al. the benefit of the doubt on the “inciting violence” part, until the violence actually materialized and the FBI warned of groups organizing online to coordinate future violent attacks.

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#649

Post by adnzzzzZ »

astrea wrote: post #574
kache_ wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People cannot post whatever they want on 4chan. On boards such as /g/, and /sci/, any off topic discussion is banned, including blatantly racist content. Other than that, there is free discussion that can be quite enlightening. And just because you choose to use a website does not mean you agree with the fringes. Just because you're a reddit user, and reddit has gore subreddits, are you into gore?

You make 4chan sounds like a utopia. Clearly you've never seen the revenge porn, gore, doxxing, etc that happens (or at least used to happen, havent been there in years) on b/.

This thread is talking about an example of doxxing on a much larger scale than anything that has ever happened on 4chan. What's your point?

Re: 70TB of Parler users’ messages, videos, and posts leaked by security researchers

#650

Post by jjk166 »

hylaride wrote: post #432
_bpkv wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Systems can be complicated and even the smallest detail can be dangerously revealing to a scrutinizing eye. "Allied intelligence noticed each captured tank had a unique serial number. With careful observation, the Allies were able to determine the serial numbers had a pattern denoting the order of tank production. Using this data, the Allies created a mathematical model to determine the rate of German tank production…

Indeed. If you look at any report/book/etc about the strategic production of war goods in WW2, you'll quickly realize that the Germans over-engineered most of their equipment. This resulted in fewer weapons and more maintenance for said weapons. The famous Tiger II tank (and most of their other planes/tanks) took longer to make, required more maintenance, consumed more fuel (a precious commodity for Germany at the ti…

It should be noted however that the Axis could never compete with the Allies in terms of quantity - America alone had over 5 times the industrial capacity of the entire Axis in 1944, and Germany was critically limited in resources like oil. Germany needed weapons that could get 10+:1 kill ratios. Further most of the late war German equipment was designed during the early war when they were doing well: it looked like their industrial base was expanding and they mostly needed equipment for well supported offensive actions. If germany had spammed tanks like the Russians did, they'ed just run out of fuel sooner. It was a gamble to go for over-engineered equipment, but it was rational even if it ultimately didn't pan out.
Post reply on HN