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

Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

play.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

841–850 of 880 posts

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#841

Post by yanderekko »

alkonaut wrote: post #776
yanderekko wrote: post #419

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a weird choice, as it still shows that merely being able to find calls for violence is not sufficient for banning an app.

This is about moderation efforts, not content. Apple/Google think Twitter has good enough responses to reported violations. Since content isn’t pre moderated it’s obvious that it will always be some of that content. The banning of this app isn’t because there are death threats but because Parler couldn’t present a moderation strategy to uphold their own ToS.

>Apple/Google think Twitter has good enough responses to reported violations.

Maybe, or maybe they just don't like Parler. I'm skeptical whether a serious attempt to clean up violent speech would ever satisfy these platforms, especially when what constitutes violent speech is determined by people who are extremely ideologically hostile and uncharitable towards you (eg. see how Twitter construed Trump's last tweets.) But we'll never know because I don't expect such a reform effort to be made.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#842

Post by CyberDildonics »

djsumdog wrote: post #327
nathankunicki wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Newspapers and magazines have always had a choice who or what to print in their papers. TV and radio stations have always had a choice who or what to air. Why shouldn't social media companies have the same liberties?

But it's different. There was a time when anyone could start a newspaper. There was a time when people had FM transmitters in their backyard. It became more expensive and the FCC started slicing up FM spectrum so everyone wouldn't trample over each other. Media was once free and then collapse to be owned by ABC, NBC, CBS and a few dozen newspapers. This was originally about network neutrality, but it applies to what…

Maybe you should find the worst comments on parler, voat, and thedonald.win then take them around to print shops and see if everyone prints them.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#843

Post by agiroth »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #661
agiroth wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Free speech != guaranteed access to a company providing access to a big audience If that's what were happening you'd probably have a point, but it isn't. "Not deleting" something is not the same as providing the audience, nor amplifying. And, by the way, yes free speech does imply some obligations on the rest of us. Speech is not free if you are not free to exercise it; "you're free to talk in a prison cell" type o…

You have never had the right of free speech on someone else’s property. This is not new in any way. I realize that there are some court cases that do guarantee free speech in extremely limited circumstances, but saying that society at large has “lost that value” doesn’t line up with any history that I’m aware of.

> You have never had the right of free speech on someone else’s property.

Wrong. You always do. They simply have free speech too.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#844

Post by agiroth »

rrose wrote: post #825
agiroth wrote: post #586

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's important to distinguish that "not deleting something" is NOT the same as amplifying it. Amplifying it would be pasting images and links to Parler all over the Google Play splash page and all over the Google Play website, sending emails to all its gmail users to download Parler, or inserting Parler ads into some % of its ad impressions. They aren't doing that. "Leave it alone" is not the same thing as amplificat…

not deleting something allows it to be shared, or at least show up in search results. it allows it to be seen by people who otherwise would not see it- this is amplification.

Absolutely but the platform isn't doing the amplification, people do. This is the same thing as someone copying your chant on a street in front of a courthouse. The street isn't doing the amplifying, the people are.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#845

Post by agiroth »

criddell wrote: post #641
agiroth wrote: post #621

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. NYT is making an editorial decision. Google publishing an app is much more akin to you making a phone call - they are the carrier, nothing else, because they control the end of line.

Phone companies also have terms of service. Here’s AT&T’s: > AT&T may immediately terminate all or a portion of your Service or reduce or suspend Service, without notice, for conduct that AT&T believes (a) is illegal, fraudulent, harassing, abusive, or intended to intimidate or threaten; (b) constitutes a violation of any law, regulation, or tariff (including, without applicable policies or guidelines (including the…

And yet somehow have never resorted to saying who can and cannot use their service based on their political beliefs.

Keep trying.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#846

Post by OCASM »

dang wrote: post #836
OCASM wrote: post #798

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So dissenting is now considered doing political flamewar? Ok.

Gratuitous provocation and name-calling are not dissent. You can express dissenting views without doing those things, and users here are required to. There is a link, though: people with minority/contrarian opinions are sometimes so frustrated with the majority that they lash out in frustration in ways that break the site guidelines. People with majority opinions don't usually do it that way. They're more likely to b…

It's always easy to willfully misconstrue what opposition says to justify their silencing. It's exactly what we're seeing at a large scale.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#847

Post by goldenkey »

wnevets wrote: post #430
goldenkey wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure how that matters, the content of the tweet still invokes violence.

You dont think a trump supporter tweeting "Let's just execute all right wing conservatives and get it over with!" as a reply to someone else (another trump supporter) matters? Its almost as if you just searched for the phrase execute all conservatives but didn't actually read any of them.

> Its almost as if you just searched for the phrase execute all conservatives but didn't actually read any of them.

> Just a cursory glance on Twitter

You chose one specific instance to be the molehill to stand on, lacking substantive argument to fight for anything more than pedantry.

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#848

Post by dang »

OCASM wrote: post #846
dang wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gratuitous provocation and name-calling are not dissent. You can express dissenting views without doing those things, and users here are required to. There is a link, though: people with minority/contrarian opinions are sometimes so frustrated with the majority that they lash out in frustration in ways that break the site guidelines. People with majority opinions don't usually do it that way. They're more likely to b…

It's always easy to willfully misconstrue what opposition says to justify their silencing. It's exactly what we're seeing at a large scale.

You're skipping that you repeatedly broke the site guidelines and repeatedly ignored our requests to stop. What do you think we should do when people break the rules and flout polite requests by moderators?

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#849

Post by adar »

sillycon-valley wrote: post #572
newacct583 wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It wasn't exactly an attack Then why was congress evacuated? Why are multiple people on camera screaming "Where is Pence?!" and threatening to hang him? Why was that cop killed? That's ridiculous, sorry. It was a chaotic attack, sure. And surely there were some people there who just wandered in with the crowd and didn't want to hurt anyone. But this is an attack on congress. Be real.

I'd say it was mostly peaceful, especially compared to the riots. Certainly didn't last as long, it cost less in property damage, less people died, and less neighborhoods burnt down. Maybe we can ban both sides from social media and have no Twitter.

What neighborhoods have burned down during the anti-police protests? And which one of the anti-police protesters killed a cop?

Re: Google suspending Parler from the Google Play store

#850

Post by Gibbon1 »

adar wrote: post #849
sillycon-valley wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd say it was mostly peaceful, especially compared to the riots. Certainly didn't last as long, it cost less in property damage, less people died, and less neighborhoods burnt down. Maybe we can ban both sides from social media and have no Twitter.

What neighborhoods have burned down during the anti-police protests? And which one of the anti-police protesters killed a cop?

Alt right terrorists Steven Carrillo and Robert Justus murdered FPS Officer David Underwood in Oakland during the BLM protests. Steven Carrillo then murdered Sheriff Sergeant Damon Gutzwiller when officers showed up at his house to arrest him.

They also seriously injured another FPS Officer during the first attack.

Post reply on HN