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

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#901

Post by itsoktocry »

Well, I can't read through 3000 comments, but I'll say here I'm surprised at the naivete I've read about this incident.

These companies didn't wake up yesterday morning and decide Parler was "bad". There's been a power shift in Washington, and they are trying to signal to the new people in power "We're on your side, we'll listen! No need to regulate us!"

That's the real problem here - there's more to this than a private company deciding who is on their platform, which is their prerogative. There is implicit (and explicit) political pressure to do so. That's what is scary and, in my opinion, wrong. And it isn't a left-right thing. I'm sure the Republicans are looking at this and getting the same message, and would be just as happy to use the same tools.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#902

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

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.

Private companies have always done this. If you keep picking fights in a bar, you will be thrown out and banned. (In most places, anyway.)

If you keep plotting insurrection, violent murder, and the overthrow of democracy, you will also be banned. As you should be. Because if you aren't banned, any form of support - whether it's delivering pizza or web services - has the potential to make you an accessory.

Most TOS are pretty clear about the "no criminal acts" part. The baffling thing isn't why those rules exist, it's why right wing extremists particularly seem to believe the rules shouldn't apply to them.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#903

Post by thewindowmovie5 »

ve55 wrote: post #4

It must feel pretty surreal to be someone that is constantly moving to different communication apps and instantly finding them pulled by anyone and everyone. We've seen an escalation of this from higher-level platforms (obviously Twitter can ban an account if they desire) to medium-level platforms (I suppose Apple gets to pick what I can do on my own phone even if it feels a bit wrong), but I'm curious if this will a…

Even though i agree with you and, in this particular case I have a hard time sympathising with Parler. After recent events and posts calling for more violence and the response of the enforcement agency last time despite having known that MAGA goons would try to disrupt the vote, I cannot think of another solution than what the tech companies are doing. Just to provide context, this is coming from a person who strongly believes these tech companies must be broken down. The events at the capitol have made me angry and the fact that 70 million people support this is just disappointing.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#904

Post by treefiddystore »

pupdogg wrote: post #396

Anyone know Parler’s tech stack? What do they use AWS for? Are they all serverless or primarily using S3 and RDS or maybe DynamoDB?

I was feeling nosey about this so looked at their open roles. Golang, postgres, cassandra, scylla, nodejs, vue, angular and wordpress all got a mention

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#905

Post by shrimpx »

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…

I think “speech at scale” should be defined differently that normal free speech. The societal impact of speech that is instantly broadcast to tens of millions of people is substantially different than the same speech being broadcast to 5-10 people.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#906

Post by nirui »

jturpin wrote: post #802
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…

I have not yet concluded whether I believe in free speech without limits, but I can at least say with confidence the following: - Freedom of speech is of extremely high importance for any free society and should not be taken for granted - Removing it in any capacity should be done with extreme care and free of any bias one way or another, with a lot of thought put into any future consequences - Speech without a platf…

Not an American but here's my two cents: I know it's about the event happened few days ago, but based on what I've learned on the other side of the Earth during these years, I think overall, Censorship in any shape or form, when encouraged, will eventually develop itself to become "Government Enforced". I guess we all know how that goes.

I know the problem is complex, but I think the solution to the problem was based on basic human impulses (And very American if I'd say so myself. Sorry), because simply deplatform the app will not actually convince it's users to leave it, it does not educate those people about what's right and wrong, and it opened a huge playground for the conspiracy theorist to play around.

All around, I think deplatforming is a bad solution to this problem.

EDIT: Clarify: I'm not here to support Parler (not even a bit), and I understand the deplatforming was for the immediate issue. However, I hope those who involved in the decision making could look for a better solution that would convince people to claim down and be rational. That's all.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#907

Post by samizdis »

The Economist has published an article [1] that discusses what it sees as increasing scrutiny of social media networks. In one paragraph, it says:

... it is hard to avoid the sense that the social-media firms have reached a point of no return. Disquiet about the power and reach of social media is not confined to political partisans. Britain, Australia, Singapore, Brazil and the EU have passed, or are mooting, new rules designed to regulate social media. The banning of the world’s most powerful politician will raise the temperature even further. The firms’ in-house enforcement policies—which are spotty and inconsistently applied—will come under even more intense scrutiny.

I found the article to be well-reasoned and thoughtful, so am posting it here because I think that it might be of interest to other HN users.

[1] https://www.economist.com/international/2021/01/10/the-expul...

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#908

Post by concordDance »

Annoyingly, the main reason Parler (and similar services) became so extreme was because the mainstream communities, organizations and platforms kept censoring conservative thought and thus driving them elsewhere. Then you end up with an echo chamber formed partially around the dislike of an outgroup... Radicalization inevitably follows.

If people and institutions had just been more tolerant about allowing conservatives to make themselves heard the polarization and alternative reality could have been avoided (as conservatives would have been much more exposed to non-conservative ideas and counterarguments rather than entering a purity spiral. The opposite direction purity spirals of the american right and left are scary).

Banning Parler is just a bandaid, the end of this route is the banning of uncensored and unmonitored communication between people.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#909

Post by falcrist »

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…

Insofar as freedom of speech is "a principle that supports the freedom of an individual or a community to articulate their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or sanction", it cannot BE limitless.

Just like every freedom, it must be limited by others' freedoms. As the saying goes "your freedom to swing your fists ends at my nose." So it is with speech. You should be able to speak your mind, but if that speech causes someone else harm, then that person's right not to be harmed must be weighed against your right to speak.

Maybe we shouldn't allow private entities like Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, etc decide where those boundaries are. I don't think capitalism is a good fit in this case.

Re: Amazon, Apple and Google Cut Off Parler

#910

Post by aussieguy1234 »

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…

In this case, I'm actually not so sure free speech was suppressed.

Businesses have free speech rights in addition to individuals.

Let's take a shop owner as an example. This particular shop owner does not support Trump. They have a community notice board on their shop where people can post things.

Of course they are not going to let a Trump supporter post a MAGA sign on that board. It's their business, they can decide whats allowed there and what isn't. Forcing them to display a MAGA sign would be essentially "forced speech" which would also violate their rights.

That doesn't prevent anyone from making MAGA signs or posting them in other places, so the free speech of those people wasn't violated in any way by the shop owner refusing to display their signs.

Therefore I think Amazon, Apple, Google and the other companies shouldn't be forced to convey messages on their platforms they don't agree with, otherwise it's violating their rights.

Post reply on HN