6 ms·
There's an amusing irony in the downvotes in this thread. The champions of free-speech angry that Apple might ban a platform for speech that ultimately led to
by Pxtl 6y ago
There's an amusing irony in the downvotes in this thread. The champions of free-speech angry that Apple might ban a platform for speech that ultimately led to an attempted insurrection? These champions of free speech seem to be agressively trying to silence anybody happy about this news.
- nailer 6y agoWhat was the insurrection? Some protestors got into the Capitol building. Don't make it out like it's more than it is.
- hilbertseries 6y agoProtestors, armed with guns and pipe bombs carrying zip ties as well. Who were seeking to stop the certification of the electoral college vote. Yes, insurrection.
- aezakmi 6y agoAre you retarded? Black panther walked into the Capitol wielding guns and nobody called it an insurrection. Gringo coasties are so retarded, ffs.
- nailer 6y agoIt's America. People arm themselves. It was far less violent and less of a show of power than taking over a police station and city blocks from the other group.
- shepardrtc 6y agoWith zip ties and molotov cocktails, and nearby, pipe bombs.
- vdnkh 6y agoJust incase you're not trolling, there were people carrying zip tie cuffs and armed with guns in the rotunda. Several doors were barricaded by the Secret Service and defended at gunpoint. At least two IEDs were found (one in the DNC offices, another in the RNC), and 5 people died. Stop making it less than it actually was.
- ALittleLight 6y agoOut of curiosity, did you think the CHAZ/CHOP protests earlier this year were an attempt at succession or revolution?
- nailer 6y agoYes that's what happens when protestors get into buildings. They bring their weapons with them. 5 people dying, mainly protestors themselves, for the amount of people pouring in to a secure building, is fairly minimal.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- muglug 6y agoWatch this footage: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2021/01/08/ashli-babbitt-shooting-video-capitol/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2021/01/08/ash... It shows men with baseball bats feet from members of congress.
- UShouldBWorking 6y agoI know! NPR is calling it a coop attempt. Like really, those idiots were going to take over the capitol and just like stay there and run things. The media and this whole generation has gone ape shit.
- technofiend 6y agoElizabeth from Knoxville was there for a revolution. She said so her self. I don't know her views after getting maced. Maybe she's down for talking it out, now?
- FireBeyond 6y agoLet's see. Guns. Handcuffs. Zip ties. Duck tape. A gallows and noose outside. A large part of the chain of leadership in one place. No, just "first amendment rights", I'm sure. No-one was ever intended to be harmed. Those chants of "Hang Mike Pence" were entirely ironic, no doubt.
- nailer 6y agoSo...guns (the rest are accessories) were bought into a building by protestors and some of the protestors died. We've seen worse last year.
- ironman1478 6y agoI think to prescribe irony would mean that the people downvoting simply have conflicting opinions and made a mistake or something. Parler is an app that, regardless of its intentions, is used to promote far right extremism and many of the people on the platform promote terrorism and facism. These people don't care about free speech. Their lives suck and can't conceptualize the fact that its not black people's fault or other's fault for their crappy life. Its the people they vote for and their immediate surroundings (so probably parents) that are at fault.
- nackerhewz 6y agoYou seem very angry, there's no need. I'm sure many people on Parler are very concerned about free speech. It is discussed often and very passionately. Some peoples lives might suck, some seem very happy, in my experience the atmosphere on Parler is generally far less depressed and hostile than on Twitter and it's quite relaxing seeing a lot more civil discourse. There does appear to be a bit more spam compared to Twitter but Twitter does have a 10 year head start.
- chroem- 6y agoYou're proposing to remove a very large, very alienated group's last public channel to express themselves peacefully. This risks further escalation. This is compounded with the stark contrast to how the protests were handled this summer.
- lovecg 6y agos/express themselves peacefully/spread lies and coordinate attacks with impunity/
- Spooky23 6y agoHuh? Its being used to organize insurrection.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- abraae 6y agoOrganizing an insurrection is expressing yourself peacefully?
- Traster 6y agoFurther escalation beyond storming the capitol? Becuase that's what tolerance has resulted in.
- Karunamon 6y agoYou call the past few years "tolerance"? Just about any and every application that attempts to support a fully free-speech network that isn't literally a web browser has been kicked off every app store out there.
- mudil 6y agoExactly. Remember when this was OK? https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19 https://twitter.com/MSNBC/status/1047935416182235136?s=19
- 6y ago
- defertoreptar 6y agoYou're comparing banning a company from the App store with having a comment show up in a lighter color.
- guscost 6y agoIt was not an attempted insurrection. It was a show of force.
- anigbrowl 6y agoIt was literally an attempt to prevent the Constitutional succession process from operating.
- guscost 6y agoYou are right that a few too many people actually had the idea that was a possible outcome. But the crowd outside was chanting “Who’s house? Our house!” and just celebrating. Then almost everyone left and did not defy the curfew.
- rubyn00bie 6y agoAre you serious? I'm sure plenty of Nazis fuckos were very polite before they shot someone. I'm sure that by your standards that would then be fine and acceptable; so long as they said, "please take of your hat" first.
- guscost 6y agoThe only person shot was an unarmed protestor/rioter.
- Findeton 6y agoI think Apple has the right to ban the app from the store. They own their whole ecosystem and that's perfectly fine with me. At the same time people have the right to protest to put pressure on Apple not to ban it. In the end Apple should be able to do whatever they please, and if people dislike it enough they'll switch to other ecosystems. It's absurd for regulators to try to run Apple "better" than Apple itself.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 6y agoI just wish being removed from the Apple app store wasn't certain death. Yeah it's a private platform they can do what they want but they're basically a monopoly too.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- foolrush 6y agoParadox of Tolerance. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- WindyLakeReturn 6y ago> that ultimately led to This seems a very dangerous line of reasoning. For example, I wonder how many violent crimes alcohol ultimately led to. How many violent crimes Facebook ultimately led to. How many violent crimes encryption ultimately led to. In a court of law, there is a distinction drawn between different events leading up to a crime, with a great deal of thought put into which of those events can be held responsible and which cannot. Now, Apple or others don't have to follow that reasoning, at least absent being involved in any court cases, but there is a great deal of wisdom in that reasoning that it would be dangerous to dismiss when politically convenient.
- nackerhewz 6y agoA very wise remark.
- mullingitover 6y agoThe difference here will be the whether Parler was negligent. If they had calls for violence on their platform that were reported to them, and their community moderation team was so short-staffed that they didn't act on them, Parler could have culpability. Facebook, et al have moderation mechanisms that can probably withstand scrutiny, but Parler sounds like an extremely lean operation that the discovery process may reveal to have negligently failed to act on information that led to death. It's not about people disliking their political speech, it's about them ignoring things they had a responsibility to act on.
- Jommi 6y agoI don't get it. Excuse the analogy but are you staying that if someone plans a protest in my Minecraft server, and the protest turns violent - I can be held to blame for that?
- mullingitover 6y agoIf someone told you people were plotting to overthrow the government on your minecraft server, and you didn't act on that, you could be culpable if that report turned out to be true. If people died, their next of kin could hold you accountable for civil damages in a wrongful death suit.
- krona 6y agoHow many people do you think your false equivalence incited, and should ycombinator.com be confiscated as a consequence?
- enjeyw 6y agoI'm fine with Parler being banned, but for what it's worth: I think you can be pro free-speech, and still be happy to use the downvote button. The downvote button is an agreed upon and standard way of expressing disagreement on the site, so is in itself a part of free-speech. That said downvoting a well-reasoned, but contrary-opinioned comment is clearly against the intention of the button, which weakens my argument a bit.
- charwalker 6y agoTo preserve liberty there must be no tolerance of intolerant behavior like terrorism, sedition and other criminal acts, and some might even say racism/sexism/etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
- throwawaysea 6y agoThere's an amusing irony to AOC asking (https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1347679332014161920 https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1347679332014161920) for Parler to be banned from the Google and Apple app stores when she personally participated in an illegal raid on the capitol in 2018 that also ended up at Pelosi's office (https://theintercept.com/2018/11/13/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-sunrise-activists-nancy-pelosi/ https://theintercept.com/2018/11/13/alexandria-ocasio-cortez...). Somehow there's no calls to ban her from Twitter or to ban The Guardian's app for running articles that excused and applauded that riot by just calling it "youthful zest" (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/17/nancy-pelosi-us-politics-left-alexandria-ocasio-cortez https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/17/nancy-...). It is incredible that people who have benefited from America's free society are now so ready to give up their commitment to the principles of free speech as soon as they get a taste of power through their monopolistic tech/social media platforms.
- dang 6y agoPlease don't break the site guidelines by going on about downvotes: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. This kind of seeming pattern is a gigantic Rohrschach blob in which people notice things based on their preconceived opinions and then backfit stories to them. Other people react based on theirs, and so we get the same exact flamewar as before, just on a meta level. Meta is internet forum crack. Flamewars on crack is bad idea.