Google bans Parler app, Asks Apple to follow...

[Tombs]

Did anyone catch what SCOTUS court case Glenn Beck just quoted on the Tucker Carlson show? Something from ~1948 I think? I'd like to read that ruling.

Could you describe what the case was about? I'll dig it up if you do.

 

[kickbacked]

Sounds like it was for the best that it was removed. Considering you had to take photos of your license and give them your ssn if i read correctly and it was hacked so easily.

 

[indyblue]

If only the .gov would do their job and ENFORCE antitrust laws we might not be where we are now.
Watching this now.
For the scotus case start at 3:49

 

[Tombs]

Sounds like it was for the best that it was removed. Considering you had to take photos of your license and give them your ssn if i read correctly and it was hacked so easily.

Was likely a setup.
70TB of user data now floating among the leftist sphere of the internet. Anyone who had given parler their real information is about to be out of the job and likely to never have one again.

 

[kickbacked]

Was likely a setup.
70TB of user data now floating among the leftist sphere of the internet. Anyone who had given parler their real information is about to be out of the job and likely to never have one again.

In what way? Like the app was put there to collect everyones info on purpose? If thats the case why's everyone upset it was taken down? Im sure 99% of people wont have any trouble with their job unless they get arrested for threats. The public has very little long term focus, theyll probably just focus on big fish.

 

[Tombs]

Did anyone catch what SCOTUS court case Glenn Beck just quoted on the Tucker Carlson show? Something from ~1948 I think? I'd like to read that ruling.

I found it for you.

Marsh v. Alabama, 326 U.S. 501 (1946)

Marsh v. Alabama: The First Amendment prohibits a law against distributing religious literature in a company-owned town without receiving permission from the town's management because this is essentially state action.

supreme.justia.com

 

[Tombs]

In what way? Like the app was put there to collect everyones info on purpose? If thats the case why's everyone upset it was taken down? Im sure 99% of people wont have any trouble with their job unless they get arrested for threats. The public has very little long term focus, theyll probably just focus on big fish.

They'll do what the left always does, dox endlessly with it.

Make the database searchable, and then every time they encounter a person online they disagree with they search them in the database, find them, then start telling their employer some random insane nonsense.

 

[indyblue]

We should not allow corporations to reduce our Republic to a mob-rules democracy. Period. Which is exactly what is happening now.

 

[jamil]

Amazon says they took Parler down for violating ToS by generally being unable to stop discussions that incite violence. Well. Okay. Maybe “inciting violence” is in the eye of the beholder. Okay. So google Amazon’s letter to Parler. They gave Parler several days to come up with a way to stop those kinds of discussions. I think Parler may lose their lawsuit. People were openly discussing assassinating Mike Pence. If it’s being used as a platform to openly plan or encourage specific violence, a platform has a responsibility to stop it. Parler was unable. This isn’t the case of cancel culture you guys think it is.

 

[brian_a_mcmillen]

Act

Amazon says they took Parler down for violating ToS by generally being unable to stop discussions that incite violence. Well. Okay. Maybe “inciting violence” is in the eye of the beholder. Okay. So google Amazon’s letter to Parler. They gave Parler several days to come up with a way to stop those kinds of discussions. I think Parler may lose their lawsuit. People were openly discussing assassinating Mike Pence. If it’s being used as a platform to openly plan or encourage specific violence, a platform has a responsibility to stop it. Parler was unable. This isn’t the case of cancel culture you guys think it is.

I have to disagree. I spent some time on Parler and 99% of the time most people pointed out how the election was stolen and were bitching but weren’t discussing insurrection or anything like it. I do remember watching suicides on Facebook in the past as well as seeing that idiot red haired, has-been chick posting a picture of the president’s severed head on Twitter just a couple of days ago (the same picture she posted 4 years ago) and crickets......nothing happens. This is a deliberate attempt to segregate and silence anyone who’s not extreme left. I’m pretty sure Parler will win the case based on anti-trust laws.

 

[jamil]

Act

I have to disagree. I spent some time on Parler and 99% of the time most people pointed out how the election was stolen and were bitching but weren’t discussing insurrection or anything like it. I do remember watching suicides on Facebook in the past as well as seeing that idiot red haired, has-been chick posting a picture of the president’s severed head on Twitter just a couple of days ago (the same picture she posted 4 years ago) and crickets......nothing happens. This is a deliberate attempt to segregate and silence anyone who’s not extreme left. I’m pretty sure Parler will win the case based on anti-trust laws.

Go look at the posts that Amazon cited in their letter which were against their ToS.

I disagreed with the shutdown of Parler. But having looked more at Amazon’s side of the story, they have a point. Talking about assassinating the vice president is unacceptable. Yes. The bitch with the severed head is the same mind of inciting. Social media should have stopped that like Amazon expects Parler to stop inciting speech on their platform.

The difference is, those platforms aren’t on Amazon’s AWS. Amazon’s ToS was not violated by twitter and facebook allowing the severed Trump head image on their platforms. Parler isn’t big enough to afford their own infrastructure. So they have to play by the rules of their host. My point wasn’t that I like the situation. It’s that it is what it is. It’s not just “cancel culture”.

 

[schwaky18]

Did you see ar15.com was just deplatformed by goaddy? Hope IGO has a contingency plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tombs]

Amazon says they took Parler down for violating ToS by generally being unable to stop discussions that incite violence. Well. Okay. Maybe “inciting violence” is in the eye of the beholder. Okay. So google Amazon’s letter to Parler. They gave Parler several days to come up with a way to stop those kinds of discussions. I think Parler may lose their lawsuit. People were openly discussing assassinating Mike Pence. If it’s being used as a platform to openly plan or encourage specific violence, a platform has a responsibility to stop it. Parler was unable. This isn’t the case of cancel culture you guys think it is.

It is unreasonable and impossible to comply with demands like Amazon made.

All you can do is play wack-a-mole with people like that, ideas can't be killed off by moderation.

 

[Tombs]

Did you see ar15.com was just deplatformed by goaddy? Hope IGO has a contingency plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ingo was hardened against it recently.

 

[jamil]

Did you see ar15.com was just deplatformed by goaddy? Hope IGO has a contingency plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Godaddy claims the same thing, that there were posts inciting violence. I think if they have examples they should make them public like Amazon did.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

 

[larcat]

Go look at the posts that Amazon cited in their letter which were against their ToS.

I disagreed with the shutdown of Parler. But having looked more at Amazon’s side of the story, they have a point. Talking about assassinating the vice president is unacceptable. Yes. The bitch with the severed head is the same mind of inciting. Social media should have stopped that like Amazon expects Parler to stop inciting speech on their platform.

The difference is, those platforms aren’t on Amazon’s AWS. Amazon’s ToS was not violated by twitter and facebook allowing the severed Trump head image on their platforms. Parler isn’t big enough to afford their own infrastructure. So they have to play by the rules of their host. My point wasn’t that I like the situation. It’s that it is what it is. It’s not just “cancel culture”.

Well...
Specific cases that are reported, if illegal, need to be removed. Fine. The whole platform thing is reactive, not proactive though. If a ToS violation is sufficient for removal, even if the offending content is removed when the site is informed, then any site can be forced into violation by you or I going on and posting content that's in violation.

AWS chose to do this. Parler may have dragged ass, but "no content in violation allowed to be posted in the first place" is an impossible standard without algos that don't exist today.

 

[Tombs]

Well...
Specific cases that are reported, if illegal, need to be removed. Fine. The whole platform thing is reactive, not proactive though. If a ToS violation is sufficient for removal, even if the offending content is removed when the site is informed, then any site can be forced into violation by you or I going on and posting content that's in violation.

AWS chose to do this. Parler may have dragged ass, but "no content in violation allowed to be posted in the first place" is an impossible standard without algos that don't exist today.

That kind of ToS isn't written with the intent to be pursed like this.

It's written with the intent of not being sued for something your customers might do.

 

[jamil]

Well...
Specific cases that are reported, if illegal, need to be removed. Fine. The whole platform thing is reactive, not proactive though. If a ToS violation is sufficient for removal, even if the offending content is removed when the site is informed, then any site can be forced into violation by you or I going on and posting content that's in violation.

AWS chose to do this. Parler may have dragged ass, but "no content in violation allowed to be posted in the first place" is an impossible standard without algos that don't exist today.

That’s a fair point. AWS said that they gave Parler several days to figure out how to police their site to prevent threatening language. As of Sunday when they shut them down, Amazon said they were not able to do it. So they pulled the plug. Now if Parler can show that they did comply with the ToS, maybe they won’t lose.

Would be nice though to see some concern that people are using these alternative sites to talk about assassinating the VP. I don’t see that as protected speech.

 

[Hatin Since 87]

That’s a fair point. AWS said that they gave Parler several days to figure out how to police their site to prevent threatening language. As of Sunday when they shut them down, Amazon said they were not able to do it. So they pulled the plug. Now if Parler can show that they did comply with the ToS, maybe they won’t lose.

Would be nice though to see some concern that people are using these alternative sites to talk about assassinating the VP. I don’t see that as protected speech.

I don’t think anyone is arguing that it’s protected speech... I think the point is they found any excuse to shut down conservative outlets, thus eliminating any competition from the Twitter/Google/Facebook monopoly on social media.