Stripe bans Trump campaign • Hacker News Board

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#931

Post by mixedCase » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 3:10 PM UTC

jf22 wrote: post #921

prepend wrote: post #910

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the case of Facebook and Google, their founders have voting majority shares and literally control the companies. It’s not a secret cabal of left-leaning owners, it is a publicly known set of left-leaning tech owners. I’m not saying they act evilly, but Facebook is literally controlled by one person who cannot be outvoted by every other owner. And Google is controlled by two as well [0]. [0] https://fortune.com/201…

Ok, that doesn't mean there is a cabal of party operatives and big tech working together...

That's not what the parent poster suggested nor the one you initially replied to. What's being discussed is big tech acting as one given their homogenous political inclinations, and user Jochim thinking this is representative of "society" at large as a way to normalize and whitewash this chain of political censorship.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#932

Post by JibJabDab » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 3:10 PM UTC

imperio59 wrote: post #665

ineedasername wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it's anti competetive. The free market advocates on HN would say that other people will create other companies and gain the market share current companies have turned down. Or that existing niche companies will find an expanded market serving them. It's also important to note that companies aren't cutting ties with Trump because of his political ideology, they're cutting ties with him because there's…

We could say there is a strong argument Joe Biden and his family broke the law, and indeed there's a criminal investigation into Hunter and associates. However not only did all the big tech companies not withdraw support for Biden or prevent his campaign from using their apps, they doubled down and censored the story so most voters would not hear of it before the elections. Again, big double standards at play here fr…

For what is Hunter being investigated for? According to several articles, its for tax and money laundering which is not at all what everyone was making a fuss about a few months ago (the laptop/emails, which reminds me of Hillary and "Her Emails!").

Given that there's uncertainty around it, can we really conclude that "they broke the law" and that it's unfair that big tech did not withdraw their support?

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#933

Post by rayiner » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 3:22 PM UTC

sgift wrote: post #900

rayiner wrote: post #809

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t even judge her for the 1970 courthouse shooting, but the New York Times is publishing flattering pieces on her even as she continues to support terrorism against Israel.

> even as she continues to support terrorism against Israel. Which terrorism does she support? Wikipedia only says that she supports BDS.

https://medium.com/@shasta_willson/the-birmingham-civil-righ...

> She has supported confessed terrorist Rasmea Odeh, and called for the release of Marwan Barghouti, a leader of the internationally designated terror group al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade. In addition to killing many dozens of Israeli civilians, the Brigade did enormous damage to Israeli support for negotiations with Palestinian groups. They were granted amnesty through a Palestinian Authority deal in which they agree to renounce terrorism. Then when Hamas took control of Gaza, they renounced the agreement and resumed attacks on Israeli civilians as Gazan fighters. Angela Davis considers them “freedom fighters” and called for Barghouti’s release, referring to him as a political prisoner. She maintains Odeh’s innocence, and claims her trial was unfair despite International Red Cross observation of the trial and a subsequent confession.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#934

Post by raxxorrax » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 3:40 PM UTC

Artistry121 wrote: post #926

raxxorrax wrote: post #862

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I firmly evaluate this behavior as negative irrespectable of the legal issues. It might look clear in the case of Trump. Freedom of speech is something civil society defines and the refusal to let people speak is something I regard very negatively. Never would have thought to say something like this in 2015, but the opposition to Trump looks inept as does this behavior from Stripe. They just didn't have…

It’s not a legal issue. People and companies have the freedom to put what they want on their websites or not. Trump just stood up and asked for his people to go to the capitol - one of his former campaign managers called for beheading members of government. Calling out his lies - a la politifact and many others - hasn’t worked to deradicalize. Fact check verifications next to the content haven’t. So - just shutting o…

I didn't work because you didn't understand the nature of the opposition. It is true that it the freedom of companies to ban people like they want to, as it is for any other side.

I don't think even the last election was a success for democrats to be honest, it was a pretty close call. But that is another metric. Trump became president and had his full term. I don't think past you would call even the current situation a success, you just reduced your expectations.

The supposed fact checkers had a clear bias and couldn't establish trust. That will take some time to get back and I doubt democrats will have success with programs that require any form of solidarity because you still define yourself as opposition to Trump. There is still a huge and solidified division. Hard to govern, but we will see.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#935

Post by cambalache » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 3:51 PM UTC

Jochim wrote: post #859

cambalache wrote: post #849

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is society? The coastal rich liberal tech owners?

Doesn't seem like any other groups are interested in supporting them either or else they wouldn't have any issue paying to self host/finding a willing provider.

So the same dynamics that has happened through history when one group is qualified as "untouchable" and any association with them, even if purely commercial, will bring retaliation.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#936

Post by nojvek » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 3:56 PM UTC

Trump could have gotten away with anything. Free speech has to have limits. Free speech, but not at the cost of lives. Trump crossed a bar, his constant spread of hatred and dividing the country led to people dying. It led to his supporters walking into the capitol with IED bombs. If they found Mike Pence or Nancy pelosi, they were ready to spill blood. People died. It has been discussed in Parler, thedonald.win, in r/TheDonald subreddit.

This is the line. If they simply protested outside, it would have been fine.

Although I am not okay with total ban forever.

The courts should be the ones deciding on such matters. We ought to have a civil debate about this. Both sides feel they are right.

I also agree that Big Tech is way too powerful and Republicans strongly feel they are suppressed. That ain’t right. Big Tech needs to be held in check. They don’t enforce their policies uniformly, neither is there a due process where both sides of the argument are heard and recorded before a judgement is made. Someone wakes up and clicks a button “Ban” without much recourse for their actions.

That’s the problem. We need more objectivity and accountability in the system.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#937

Post by jariel » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 4:16 PM UTC

yurielt wrote: post #875

jariel wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"For all intents and purposes, freedom of speech has flatlined in America." No - 'Freedom of Speech' is at an all time high. The internet gives every single person a giant soap box to stand on. You can communicate, in public, with anyone in the world. 25 years ago, you had no voice. Now, everyone can be a 'journalist' or 'agitator' or whatever. The level of open communication possible today was unthinkable 25 years a…

Yeah but ten years ahorita you used to have a lot more freedom in the same platforms as you know that please don’t be dishonest

That's really not the case.

These platforms haven't changed that much in terms of their policies.

If you called someone the n-word or tried to coordinate murder of some public official you would be banned.

Bannon was calling for Dr. Fauci to be beheaded a few days ago. That's what got him banned from Twitter.

Gen. Flynn was calling for public officials to be executed. He was banned.

Get it?

Twitter has not really changed that much - the public, and their expectations of 'freedom of expression' in the face of politics has changed.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#938

Post by nec4b » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 4:49 PM UTC

jf22 wrote: post #923

nec4b wrote: post #904

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not the one lumping them together, they lumped themselves together the same way unions and the Democratic party did a long time ago. Revolving doors, clientelism, business opportunities, power struggle,...

What? People who agree and have a common interests are not immediately part of a group who move as one.

> People who agree and have a common interests...

> Revolving doors, clientelism, business opportunities, power struggle,...

Add activism, donations, candidate support and cooperating with them on a local and global level.

Seems like a text book definition of a political party.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#939

Post by ineedasername » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 4:51 PM UTC

syshum wrote: post #843

ineedasername wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exercise of free market principles by platforms booting people/entities that violate their ToS isn't totalitarian.

This would be true if the ToS was applied evenly with out political bias

My reading of the situation is that Twitter etc. we're fine turning a (not very) blind eye until President Trump did something that is arguably illegal. At that point self-interest kicked in as they realized "oh crap since he did this with the help of our platform and we've been letting him violate our own rules we may have legal liability OMG ban!"

Heck, AWS hosts the National Enquirer, the publication that tried to blackmail AWS's owner with genital pics. It's difficult to claim anti-conservative bias when so much borderline and over the line extreme right content is allowed to remain.

If there's an appearance of conservative bias then I believe it is because between President Trump peddling conspiracy theories and general hatred of those who oppose him, it simply caused more extremist content to be posted, and therefore more to be banned. It's not bias is there really is a lot more extreme right content.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#940

Post by MrPatan » Mon, Jan 11, 2021, 4:55 PM UTC

thrwawy12345 wrote: post #829

colejohnson66 wrote: post #765

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Hunter Biden conspiracy has been debunked dozens of times over. That’s why the companies haven’t withdrawn support for his family. Trump, OTOH, has pushed the boundaries of acceptable his entire presidency, and has almost certainly broken the law in the process many time.

Do you happen to have a link or other source to this debunking?

I can do a quick google and find so many journalists in twitter saying the story is debunked! What do you want twitter to do in the face of such overwhelming evidence coming from twitter?