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

Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 1001 posts

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#71

Post by domano »

NDizzle wrote: post #57
standardUser wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about finding posts encouraging violence, it is about refusing to try to moderate that content, and your suggestion otherwise is disingenuous. If Facebook said "we are no longer going to try and moderate content that incites violence" there would obviously be blowback.

It wouldn't be such a big deal if "hurts feelings" didn't equal "incites violence". Silence is also violence. All of you lurkers will be purged as well.

I do not understand what you are saying, could you clarify?

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#72

Post by jcranmer »

notsureaboutpg wrote: post #45
chasing wrote: post #41

Parler wasn't some innocent social media site that happened to have some disgusting content on it. The disgusting content was literally its reason for existing, despite all of the bland "we're just a free speech site" stuff. And I have yet to hear anyone discuss how "anything goes" and social media do not mix. It's much easier to turn a community toxic than it is to keep it healthy, and healthy communities (of any so…

The NYT lied to the American public to whip them up into supporting the Iraq War, which led to the deaths of millions of people (many of them innocent). Why won't AWS, Google, and Apple collectively ban them? Their open calls for violence were far more consequential and severe and serious than anything on Parler

> which led to the deaths of millions of people (many of them innocent).

Actually, looking up the numbers right now, the total civilian death rate is perhaps 1 million at most, more likely somewhere in the 100,000s. Iraq Body Count gives ~200k civilian deaths; estimation from the number of internally-displaced peoples (basically figuring that displaced-to-dead ration is between 5:1 and 10:1) suggests a number more like ~700k civilian deaths. Extrapolating excess death counts suggest that the latter number is more accurate.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#73

Post by verytrivial »

I find it slightly ironic that the fruits of the whole ARPANET project around network routing resilience in the face of node failure due to enemy attack (domestic or foreign) ends up threatening the health of the Republic because we can no longer tell who is an ememy (domestic or foreign) on the resilient network.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#74

Post by InitialLastName »

mensetmanusman wrote: post #5

It would be interesting if power companies run by various oligarchs started disconnecting power to AWS servers: “go generate your own power” Or maybe food delivery truck drivers is a better analogy since that isn’t a utility...

It's more like if I rent you an apartment in my building and then find out you're using it to manufacture bombs. If you end up blowing up a bridge and it can be determined that I knew about your actions, I can potentially be held liable (in the PR sense, if not the legal sense) for abetting terrorism.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#75

Post by blamestross »

maxerickson wrote: post #17
mensetmanusman wrote: post #5

It would be interesting if power companies run by various oligarchs started disconnecting power to AWS servers: “go generate your own power” Or maybe food delivery truck drivers is a better analogy since that isn’t a utility...

Yes, power companies have different regulations than AWS. Which means the analogy is boring. There's probably a good discussion to be had about how to regulate services like AWS though. The dynamics are probably different, with power companies not quite having the same potential for wanting to disassociate from noxious customers.

I think the interesting takeaway is that so many people consider social media and internet hosting to essentially be public services. The hidden premise/misunderstanding in the "social media censorship" concept is that they are so critical to participation in society that they should be a right like power or water. There are arguments for moving things like internet access into being a public utility. It is interesting that they have skipped directly to wanting to socialize social media.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#76

Post by Fellshard »

CivBase wrote: post #2

I don't know which social media platforms use AWS to any critical extent, but I can't imagine them ejecting a big name like Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, etc over "finding dozens of posts on the service which it said encouraged violence".

It's the clear double standard that makes this concerning.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#77

Post by cs-szazz »

Serious question, it seems AWS is by no means a monopoly on web hosting (Google, Azure, Digital Ocean, Linode, the list goes on). It seems to be they're well within their rights as a company to not host Parler, and Parler can try to go somewhere else. If no other companies want to host Parler, isn't that more a reflection of Parler than the hosting companies? It doesn't seem like they should be obligated to host, since that's as slippery a slope as not hosting is. Perhaps this is a decision where not everyone will ever be happy, and that's just how it's going to be?

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#78

Post by abarringer »

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…

oh com'n. As if twitter doesn't allow people to post stupid junk? Multiple accounts that posted "Kill all white women" "Today seems like a good day for another reminder that all republicans deserve to die" are still active along with plenty of other insane things. You can cherry pick bad stuff from any social media site.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#79

Post by sascha_sl »

ortusdux wrote: post #7

It fascinates me that the people most offended by the recent actions of google, amazon, facebook, etc are the ones pushing for the repeal of section 230.

In the same way that you'd be fascinated by Trump wanting to "open up those libal laws" when he himself would be severely affected (but could probably mitigate it away with enough lawyers)?

It's a special form of doublethink where aesthetics and actions can go into completely opposite directions. Many republican campaigns have made great use of this, particularly to appeal to rural america.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#80

Post by gedy »

vorpalhex wrote: post #62
chasing wrote: post #41

Parler wasn't some innocent social media site that happened to have some disgusting content on it. The disgusting content was literally its reason for existing, despite all of the bland "we're just a free speech site" stuff. And I have yet to hear anyone discuss how "anything goes" and social media do not mix. It's much easier to turn a community toxic than it is to keep it healthy, and healthy communities (of any so…

[flagged]

Yeah as a centrist, the double standards we are seeing is what concerns me the most. Instead of all violence and hatred is bad it's "well this is different because they are on our side", that's for "the right reasons", etc to read between the lines.
Post reply on HN