981–990 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think the difference is that r/politics doesnt actually ban you for posting something conservative, its just the users deciding they dont like it. I dont use it either way due to their horrible link rules, but there is definitely a difference in my opinion.
You're silenced by moderators or you're silenced by users. I don't see much difference in the end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it is factually correct. They said 'since', not larger than. In the meantime, since 9/11 there have as far as I know it not been any larger attacks within the US on the United States itself. If you know of any then please correct me.
Perhaps the 2017 Congressional baseball shooting where 24 members were attacked and one nearly died?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Defamation is not free speech, it's illegal.
Defamation posted to Parler by users was not illegal for Parler to host. Section 230 covers them there. I'd expect a "free speech" site to allow it.
Edit: assuming there’s a federal law about it. Not sure how civil litigation is handled. Not a lawyer, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I didn't know Parler before. I'm not American, and I'm definitely not a right-wing supporter. But that's not the same as Youtube/Facebook/Spotify tries to do? Good for ads and supporting their political agenda? References: - https://medium.com/swlh/youtube-algorithm-rigged-breadtube-e... - https://theindustryobserver.thebrag.com/spotify-joe-rogan/ EDIT: Wow: So many down-votes in less than a minute, without any comme…
His statements are not backed by any evidence, so I don't know what to make of them. Nonetheless an interesting opinion by someone that has done some great things that certainly tickeled my curiosity, +1
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a difference between being deplatformed by AWS and being served thousands of lawsuits at once.
Maybe AWS wants to preempt those lawsuits by just ridding themselves of the headache? Don't blame them. Amazon is not in the "hosting controversial content for shits and giggles" business.
Lawyers usually aren't going to go too hard after Parler end users, most of them don't have much money. Amazon however is a different story.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24876481
I was talking about weev, not Aaron.
Weev, at best, committed the equivalent of a misdemeanor in my mind, and that's probably only because he kept downloading everything he could even after they had enough to call attention to the issue.
I think a similar case happened with a teenager accessing public records in a hidden directory on a government server, they tried to throw the book at him too for calling attention to it, when legally citizens could access the data anyway, and they were the ones that made it available to public. They tried to ruin the kids life over it, but thankfully cooler heads and a public outcry about it prevailed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I fail to see the importance of these people's privacy in the wake of recent events. I also fail to have sympathy for people who trusted this hacked-together Twitter clone with their personal information. Then I fail to have any sympathy and solidarity with you. You're just another violent extremist in my eyes, and the enemy of my enemy is not my friend by a long shot.
> You're just another violent extremist in my eyes, Can you explain how not caring that a bunch of people got their data leaked makes you a "violent extremist"?
> He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.
-- Martin Luther King, Jr.
But if you don't mind their use of "violent extremists" apropos nothing, no, I don't particularly "care to" explain myself to you for using the same phrase in response to them -- I just do it because I can. You could simply remove or ignore my re-using that phrase and my point would stand unchanged. Address the core of an argument, don't just play "gotcha" while ignoring the context and the woods for the trees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By default, nobody sees those comments–you have to go to showdead in your profile to enable it. I keep it on because it gives me occasional insight into the dregs of the site and the effort that goes into moderating it, but also lets me save the insightful comments that get killed (or, very rarely, erroneously flagged.)
Right, I showdead for similar reasons. I figured that shadowbanning would prevent even showdead from revealing those comments, but apparently not: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23686672