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

811–820 of 1001 posts

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#811

Post by mmmmmbop »

cycop wrote: post #705
Closi wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For now, don't attempt to overturn a fair democratic election and install an illegitimate government. Seems like a pretty easy thing to stay clear of. I don't think it is though - the point is who decides if the democratic election was fair? What happens in a foreign country if their government decides the election isn't fair? Should people be silenced? Or is it Amazon's job now to work out if worldwide elections a…

The platform being used for organizing potential mass murder of targeted groups. If the screenshots are correct of what I have seen then AWS had no choice. They would have been liable if something really bad happened and was made aware of this before it happened. Parler has no monitoring of this activity and that is why everyone shut them down once it was exposed.

Note that in the past AWS has been more than open to hosting platforms organizing potential mass murder of targeted groups, to the point of issuing a lawsuit after a competitor was chosen to host the platform. [1]

[1] https://www.irishtimes.com/business/media-and-marketing/amaz...

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#812

Post by wan23 »

sn_master wrote: post #491
Johnny555 wrote: post #413

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

"legal" in a democracy is something that only a court can decide. I don't know what was Parler's size, but in any website with millions of visitors a handful will post aweful things each day. Were those 98 posts posted by the same user? Did anyone report them and Parler refused to take them down? Were they popular or downvoted with few views?

Everyone is responsible for knowing if their actions are legal or not. If you shoot someone on the street and use the defense that you thought it was legal because a court didn't tell you that it wasn't in advance, then you're going to have a bad time.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#813

Post by cphoover »

Closi wrote: post #716
hchz wrote: post #698

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The United States Government decided it was fair, in many administrative and legal venues, across the country. Many Republican officials and judges affirmed it, even under intense and illegal pressure from the President and his cadre. This platform was used to coordinate an insurrection against the United States Government, and refused to act against those doing so. The severity of insurrection in US legal code is su…

> The United States Government decided it was fair, in many administrative and legal venues, across the country. Many Republican officials and judges affirmed it, even under intense and illegal pressure from the President and his cadre. So if the Russian government and Russian courts decide their election was fair and just, should Amazon shut down any websites which counter that viewpoint? Because that's the preceden…

well stated

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#815

Post by bhntr3 »

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…

If you host user-generated content, you will have to decide on community standards and do your best to enforce them. This will be expensive. You are legally obligated to police things like terrorism, child pornography, money laundering and even DMCA violations. You are morally obligated to do more than just that, not just by your conscience, but also by the global zeitgeist.

Of course some absurdity lies in making believe your corporation has a conscience. You may have a conscience. But ultimately, no matter what corporate culture you instill, your corporation is a psychopath.

So your corporation will be Dexter and you do your best to operate it like it cares about people and issues and is a good citizen (since after all, it is legally a person.) If you do this poorly, it is revealed to have no soul and punished. If you do it well, you get a brand.

If covering for a psychopath whose only motivation is money and whose opinions are the amalgamation of half-formed thoughts from hundreds or thousands of different individuals isn't your idea of a good time, then maybe running a business isn't the best idea.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#816

Post by nsxwolf »

Who decided that Twitter does a "good enough job" at moderation? The platform was used to organize riots all summer, unchecked. I can find MAGA insurrectionists talking about violence with a simple search right now.

Was Parler shut down simply because they don't moderate at all? Signal doesn't moderate at all, either. Because they can't. It's by design. Why don't we go after Signal? Out of sight, out of mind? Is that it?

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#817

Post by Dem_Boys »

Trump/parler is being de-platformed for "inciting violence" but what exactly does that mean?

Obvious case: "Go and hurt that person"

Trump's case: "The election was rigged"

Trump created a (wrong)conspiracy theory that was believed by enough (radical)people to cause real violence and death. I don't __think__ he ever actually said "Storm the capital and break down the doors".

So if I say on Twitter that Google is hiding Elvis in their Mountain View office and people break down the doors of Google to go see, did I just insight violence? If any idea leads to violence, should the author of the idea pay the price for the violence created by others?

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#818

Post by f430 »

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…

Excellent points I agree that this sets a dangerous precedent.

> What are the best mitigations here, both technical and social

We are witnessing it now on HN. There's a huge uptick in deplatform-proof p2p mesh networks running web applications.

How do you take down a mesh network that will simply regenerate and absorb most external shocks?

I believe that the future of the internet would be fragmented into a conventional centralized server like we see with AWS dominating the market which will still serve useful purpose for most applications and another for the rest.

With Moore's law and 6G we are heading towards a hyper connected world that will facilitate the rise of robust, secure, mesh network based software that runs on our phones.

It will not be without trouble, people will find ways to poison the well. The mesh network would evolve into essentially islands where you physically travel to in order to join that private network to minimize DDOS, MITM attacks.

It would be a cyberpunkesque reality where to buy a bag of weed in a non-legal state, you simply head towards a dark alley, connect to the mesh network, find the drop, and head back to your tiny apartment occasionally poking your head out the window to take in the sights of foggy neon-lit streets with flying cars and spiky haired gender-neutral entities shouting "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it no more!"

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#819

Post by names_are_hard »

Johnny555 wrote: post #632
names_are_hard wrote: post #607

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 th…

It is the responsibility of the government to determine what's legal and not, there's an entire court system that does just that. And Parler is using that system by filing a suit against AWS. But that doesn't mean that I can help someone load a body into his car, then tell police later "Well, I wasn't sure if he was legally killed or not, so I was just trying to help out, it's not my job to determine legality, I was…

Ok, fair point. I think you convinced me that Amazon had a moral responsibility to terminate their relationship with anyone they believe is breaking the the law. I suppose that if the customer sues and wins they can try to recover damages.

Re: Parler drops offline after Amazon pulls support

#820

Post by paulnechifor »

vb6sp6 wrote: post #687
chr1 wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Anyone not using these hosts to promote terrorism The power always changes hands, and people who were passing laws calling random things "terrorism" end up on the other side of their laws. I guess for now you can have fun watching how Patriot Act championed buy republicans gets used against themselves. Sadly with full control over all branches, democrats will continue eroding freedoms and laws restraining the gover…

AWS' response wasn't based on 'calling random things "terrorism"'. it was based on things that actually happened so I think the response is proportional. > I guess for now you can have fun watching how Patriot Act championed buy republicans gets used against themselves The government didn't get involved here. This is two companies deciding not to do business with each other > Sadly with full control over all branches…

AWS's response was based on its legal right to shut down every customer it is biased against. Nothing was adjudicated in court.
Post reply on HN