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

Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

761–770 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#761

Post by whotfru »

Just like with COVID, this reaction is probably way too late to work the way some of you hope.

IMO you are probably now radicalizing the more moderate members of what seems to be a significant proportion of your population by giving them actual cause for their feelings of persecution.

How is anyone surprised after years of Democrats claiming that the Russians were able to compromise the 2016 election in Trumps favour, that there are now people who believe their candidate has lost an election due to manipulation?

There is guilt on both sides for this mess, I hope you guys can work it out.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#762

Post by bananamerica »

oliv__ wrote: post #628

I'm having a real hard time understanding how all the comments in the thread are in favor of this. I mean, even if you disagree with the idea of Parler, how can one willingly support this kind of censorship? "First they came for the XYZ and I didn't care because I wasn't XYZ, then they came for the ..., and then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me"

I take issue with the indiscriminate use of the word “censorship”. If a newspaper of a certain inclination only gives space for those that are aligned to its tendencies, no one calls that censorship. Private companies moderate and editorialize. That’s their prerogative. Governments employ censorship.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#763

Post by croes »

ianbutler wrote: post #758

I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…

The problem here is that private companies are doing something that only democratically legitimized state authorities should be doing, deciding what is allowed or not allowed. Otherwise we are always dependent on the good will of the companies without democratic control.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#764

Post by zo1 »

ianbutler wrote: post #758

I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…

Right now I sit in a country that has laws that discriminate against me due to the color of my skin.

If we can't discuss and address it and other sensitive things like it that are evil and are approved-speech by tech then we're doomed as a society, and I'd say we're no better than actual racists, oppressors and slavers from days past.

Moves like this by tech companies only makes it worse and more difficult to discuss this.

I don't know where I'm going with this, but these recent steps taken by tech are incredibly disturbing.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#765

Post by loceng »

ianbutler wrote: post #758

I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…

Agreed. Data and network portability is important policy that must be passed as a means to "vote" of disapproval of governance by a platform by being able to easily move yourself off of it.

It's naive to think that like-minded people won't find an online place to rally, and then eventually rally in person when they feel necessary or are incited ton do so - in this case the ongoing coup attempt is based on lies. It's a futile effort to try to suppress them, they will just gather elsewhere and the deplatforming will be a justification in their mind that they're being persecuted, as the digital/speech will inevitably manifest into the physical where the confrontation can't be avoided.

I do see the deplatforming akin to parents attempting to teach a child their behaviour isn't acceptable, the problem is these children aren't understanding that - and they're adults now without anyone reasonable that they look up to or listen to as a good role model; they've listened to Trump et al who are pushing the false narrative of election fraud, so they will feel justified in violent actions.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#766

Post by eganist »

ianbutler wrote: post #758

I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…

On top of that, the United States has never had "free speech without limits." Or any rights without limits. A core tenet of at least one political ideology in the United States is the idea that one's rights only extend as far as another's unharmed state of existence. i.e. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/10/15/liberty-fist-nose/

Such limitations in the case of the first amendment are pretty well captured here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_free_speech_exce...

Credible threats of violence and incitement register with exceptionally strong precedent. Fighting words and threatening the President-Elect of the United States are two such categories of unprotected speech with, again, exceptionally strong precedent.

Anyone claiming their freedom of speech is being violated in this scenario by pushing fighting words and specific threats may be failing to understand:

1. that such freedoms don't extend as protection from being barred by private property and enterprise, and

2. that even if they did, their words are exempt... again, with strong law and case law.

I do agree that there's value in exploring registering social media and communications platforms as utilities. I don't yet know the implications of such.

And on another note (and borrowing from an earlier comment of mine), I do wonder how many of the Parler removals that have taken place used Wednesday as the justification but in reality were done for FOSTA/SESTA cover, which ironically is a law passed within the last few years.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#767

Post by loceng »

croes wrote: post #763
ianbutler wrote: post #758

I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…

The problem here is that private companies are doing something that only democratically legitimized state authorities should be doing, deciding what is allowed or not allowed. Otherwise we are always dependent on the good will of the companies without democratic control.

This isn't a problem, it's a feature. You seem to be in a scarcity, learned helplessness mindset: if you're worried about being dependant on companies that you don't believe or trust will govern well then the solution is simple, start your own company so you're the governor; so long as the internet as a platform stays relatively neutral you can do that. If you don't think this is an option, please explain why.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#768

Post by bananamerica »

danhak wrote: post #164

The same folks who think you can't force a bakery to bake a gay cake want to force Apple to distribute an app or Twitter to publish anyone's nonsense. You can't have it both ways. For the self-proclaimed free-marketers, how is this different? It's about scale. We have an antitrust issue, not a free speech issue.

The difference, of course, is that, unlike Parler, a “gay cake” poses no threat whatsoever to democracy.

So I’d say we can definitely have it both ways.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#770

Post by tmandry »

croes wrote: post #763
ianbutler wrote: post #758

I'm just going to come out and say something that I've had a hard self reflective time coming to the conclusion of. I don't believe in free speech without limits. I have strongly felt that the actions taken by these companies is morally and ethically the right thing to do, for any business and that is inconsistent with believing in true free speech. My line for free speech seems to lie in speech that incites violence…

The problem here is that private companies are doing something that only democratically legitimized state authorities should be doing, deciding what is allowed or not allowed. Otherwise we are always dependent on the good will of the companies without democratic control.

> Otherwise we are always dependent on the good will of the companies without democratic control.

Yes, but that’s already true without this action, which doesn’t make them any more or less democratically controlled. A more democratic way of deciding clear limits on free speech would be great, but the absence of one doesn’t mean the platforms should sit on their hands and do nothing while the world burns.

Post reply on HN