8 ms·

Google Bans Parler from the Google Play Store

50 points by monksy 6y ago

monksy 6y ago
Other validation: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.parler.parler&hl=en_US&gl=US https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.parler.par... Gone. I can't find the official statement. The tech journalist is the best I could do.
rvz 6y ago
Coordinated bans everywhere. Build your own platform they said. They'll just instruct them to download the APK on their phones instead, just like Epic games did for Fortnite. Even so, I think it will only get worse. They'll also move to encrypted chat apps instead. So when will Signal and Telegram be targeted and banned from the App Store or Google Play Store?
- jjulius 6y ago
  >They'll just instruct them to download the APK on their phones... I mean, they could always just open their phone's browser and go to parler.com. Apps might be gone but it's not like they're unreachable.
  - waheoo 6y ago
    Yeah, should they look up "parlour website" on Google? Using Google Chrome? Or should they ask Siri and look it up on safari? Regardless, the same could be said for Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Amazon, Gmail, and countless other apps. But nobody would be cause that's just being facetious.
- threeseed 6y ago
  > So when will Signal and Telegram be targeted and banned They won't. Because neither is promoting the use of its platforms for illegal behaviour. Or refusing to take responsibility if such behaviour is found. Parler CEO said "I don't feel responsible for any of this and neither should the platform".
  - Yetanfou 6y ago
    Twitter was and is used to coordinate illegal behaviour, the riots of last summer are a good example. When will Google and Apple ban Twitter? They won't. The question is why Twitter is allowed on these platforms but not Parler or Gab or whatever other Twitter-competitor.
    - tzs 6y ago
      Twitter moderates user content. They have suspended or banned a large number of accounts for calling for violence, or even for wishing ill upon people (e.g., a lot of people got suspended for Tweeting when Trump got COVID that they hoped he would die from it). Parler does not. There are numerous accounts on Parler calling for the killing of Pelosi, Biden, Pence, Chief Justice Roberts, assorted judges that ruled against Trump's lawsuits, state and local election officials, Republican governors and legislators who are not fighting hard enough for Trump, and numerous others. There were numerous accounts their calling for storming the Capital on January 6th and stopping the electoral vote counting using any force necessary to achieve this. In short, Twitter is not banned because Twitter tries to comply with Apple's and Google's requirements to moderate user content and remove threats of violence, and Parler is getting banned because they do not.
      - Yetanfou 6y ago
        There is a plethora of similar content to be found on Twitter so that is not the reason. The mentioned platforms also moderate user content, they just have different guidelines. Both claim to follow the law in that they take down content which violates it. Both claim that only illegal content is taken down. That is, as far as I can see, in line with the expectations for a platform to be considered a "common carrier" and as such be freed from liability for its users' content. Platforms which go beyond this by moderating on different grounds run the risk of being considered publishers and as such to be held responsible for their users' content. If Apple and Google put further demands on those platforms the question becomes who eventually is responsible for user content, this might end up being Apple and Google. That, in turn, should make developers think twice whether they benefit from being on those platforms. The alternative is to deploy to the web without any "native" apps (which often are not much more than rehashed web apps to begin with) which opens their product to a wider user base without needing to bend to the will of third parties. This would be a good thing in my opinion. The time for "native" apps has come and gone, the time for the web has been there for a long time but this might just be the push needed to convince developers to make it their prime focus. This goes especially for communications-focused products since those derive their usefulness from being connected to the 'net anyway. There is still a place for native apps - offline mapping, offline media players, hardware-interfacing apps like Wifi-scanners, step counters etc - but those tend not to be the ones which end up in hot water anyway.
lame-robot-hoax 6y ago
Oddly enough, if Storm Front tried to put an app on the Google Play Store, I don’t think many would be up in arms over it being removed. Yet when they remove an app used to coordinate the invasion of the capitol building by people with pipe bombs, molotovs, guns, zip ties, bats, etc. it’s suddenly not acceptable? An app that has people openly calling for death to US congressional leaders and the Vice President, and the president elect?
- Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
  If you were treated like how they are, you would be calling for violence too.
  - jhk4 6y ago
    What treatment in particular do you think justifies calls for violence on the part of Trump supporters?
    - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
      Being completely robbed of an outlet for your frustrations while people call for you to be murdered on twitter. https://cdn.cnsnews.com/styles/article_big/s3/2021-01/Arthur%20Chu_1.jpg https://cdn.cnsnews.com/styles/article_big/s3/2021-01/Arthur...
      - ffs_123321 6y ago
        "Murder" by definition is an unlawful killing. When you storm the fucking Capitol building with a mob wielding deadly weapons and openly discussing hanging the Vice President, you are not protesting you are committing suicide by cop. Get your head out of your ass.
        Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
        You are generalizing all the protesters based on what some of them did. The woman who did get murdered was unarmed. And Arthur Chu isn't just talking about the people at the capitol - he's talking about all trump supporters.
Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
This is the Night of The Long Knives 2.0.
- ffs_123321 6y ago
  What a goddamn stupid thing that is to say. For fuck's sake.
- archi42 6y ago
  I am not sure how you're seriously considering this comparison. The actions by Apple, Google or Twitter are not a massacre on the political enemy (in fact, I don't consider companies to have political enemies beyond the SEC and other regulatory instances). It's not even a call to murder anyone. On the other hand, the "Nacht der Langen Dolche" was a coordinated massacre of (among others victims?) political enemies, with the goal to reinforce the political power of a discriminatory regime (which, just to be perfectly clear, was governed by an ideology that openly planned and then proceeded to kill of millions of human beings). That killing blow on the German democracy is a different league, even compared to the recent attack on democracy the world witnessed in DC (an attack on the elected representatives of the US, fueled by the elected president, so there are some parallels, but not the ones you intended to point out?). Some (imho much too large) companies getting their act together and moving in against hate speech and people outright calling for the killing of their political enemy, however, is not about murdering people. (I guess[!] it's about covering their ass, because mentioned regulatory instances will investigate why it became so easy to spread wild murder fantasies across the Internet and into the real world. With, surprise, people getting killed and democracy seriously endangered).
  - Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
    This is a coordinated silencing political enemies, with the goal to reinforce the political power of a discriminatory regime. You are banned on Twitter and Facebook, you can not have your own app, your web hosting will drop you (they call on Cloudflare to drop thedonald), they'll revoke your domains and ssl certificates... Literally giving you no options at all to speak online, CCP style. So the only difference here is that the political opponents are merely silenced instead of massacre. To think of it further, if you control all sources of information, you can not stop at silencing, no one will know if you kill them anyway - and even if they do, and somehow post about it, just write 'this has already been debunked', and a nice factcheck banner. This is an incredibly sad day for all world and a turn for the worse. You'll see.
TigeriusKirk 6y ago
I'd really hoped for de-escalation, but we're going in exactly the opposite direction.
- polka_haunts_us 6y ago
  This is the issue with people who believe in unilateral nuclear disarmament: what if the other side doesn't want to disarm. De-escalation takes 2, and Trump does not appear to be de-escalating.
- justiceforsaas 6y ago
  That's also what I thought. Instead of using fire extinguishers, FB/Apple/Google are adding more gasoline to the fire. This is going to radicalize people (especially conspiracy theorists) who now think have actual, indisputable "proof" these companies are there to get them.
  - lame-robot-hoax 6y ago
    This is my main worry. I’m not worried about Parler getting taken down, they have no intrinsic right to have access to these stores hosted by private entities. They can self host, or find someone willing to host them, or implement moderation so they don’t have people calling for the death of senators on their service. But I am worried this will light a fuse towards further radicalization.
    - millzlane 6y ago
      Radicalization because they're too lazy or too dumb or whatever to create their own platform. I'd be mad too if I couldn't harass folks and spread my hate easily.
      - waheoo 6y ago
        ^ the irony
    - rvanlaar 6y ago
Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
Google and Apple just radicalized millions of people.
- hadrien01 6y ago
  Millions?
  - bra-ket 6y ago
    74M
    - ffs_123321 6y ago
      Those people were already radicalized.
      - deleted 6y ago
        [deleted]
    - twiceaday 6y ago
      This is Trump idolizing nonsense. Most people simply voted for the republican. It could have been anybody.
      - bra-ket 6y ago
        we voted against ‘liberal’ version of fascism. Unfortunately fascism won.
        cable2600 6y ago
        You mean Social Progressivism?
        bra-ket 6y ago
        Yeah, the kind of 'progressivism' that calls for silencing all opposition through censorship, propaganda and intimidation.
holler 6y ago
Is there any argument for anti-competitive behavior here? It's weird because Google/Apple don't directly compete with Parler or other alternate social media sites, but they are clearly in the same bed with those who do, Facebook, Twitter. For instance Jack Dorsey recently admitted that his employees coordinate with employees at the other big tech companies on moderation actions. I'm just wondering what if any legal courses these actions could take?
- Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
  YES. Banning parler on the same day you ban Trump? This was planned and co-ordinated by Twitter and Apple. It's likely the activist group "Sleeping Giants" is involved as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeping_Giants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeping_Giants
  - 2311ski 6y ago
    It's conspiracies all the way down for you folks isn't it?
    - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
      Big Tech has collaborated to de-platform people before. Remember when Alex Jones got banned from literally everything in one day?
      - ffs_123321 6y ago
        You mean when he was illegally harassing victims of a school shooting?
        Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
        I don't remember exactly why they did it, but they did it. So we can say that yes, big tech definitely works together to de-platform people.
      - 6y ago
LatteLazy 6y ago
Urg. Now I need to stick to my free speech principles, even though parler censors it's users and is a general shit show of self re-ebforcing misinformation and racism...
bra-ket 6y ago
US is skipping socialism on way to communism. The next logical step is isolate enemies of the people before they do further damage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_people#Soviet_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_people#Soviet_Uni...
- millzlane 6y ago
  The government didn't do it. Noone is arresting anyone for group think or saying what they want. People are just kicking them out of their houses. Don't like it? Build your own house, make your own rules. Fund your own cause.
  - verwyrelevant 6y ago
    This comic is very relevant to your point: http://stonetoss.com/comic/build-big/ http://stonetoss.com/comic/build-big/ Don't complain when it starts happening.
    - millzlane 6y ago
      Makes sense. But mail order still exists. At least we can still say what we want to promote change without fear of arrest from our government. If the argument is just. I'm sure it will do well on it's own. Democracy isn't perfect but it's better than the alternatives.
  - tasogare 6y ago
    The government doesn’t need to do it, since it has been replaced on a lot of matter by corporations. Never in history companies held that much power on people’s life. Arguing for deplatforming because "muh private" is missing the fact democracy emerged to limit the most powerful entity at the time (government). Now that companies are the most powerful element of society, their power needs to be limited as well.
    - millzlane 6y ago
      They're not the most powerful. They're just the most popular. There is a difference. They have ZERO control over your life. I know because I don't use any of them and I live just fine.
mastazi 6y ago
Lately I have discovered that progressive web apps can work quite well on mobile devices, to the point that they can be undistinguishable from native apps. I wonder if PWAs will become more common as a result of the divided political spectrum.
- throw_m239339 6y ago
  off topic, but as a developer, I still have not figured out what is the difference between a website and a "progressive web app". I just don't get why a bunch of different features makes websites any different. It really just sound like a marketing buzzword too me, not backed by any meaningful technical paradigm change. What makes them 'progressive'? To me the problem with webapps in general or (rich internet applications) is that the developer has very little control over caching or storage since it's very dependent on the whims of browser engine.
  - postalrat 6y ago
    It's kinda like when SPAs became popular. A progressive web app is just a regular website (typically a SPA but not necessarily) that typically takes advantage of a few newer web APIs that can make it behave more native app like when those APIs are supported.
  - eyelidlessness 6y ago
    Not that I want to promote getting parler on more screens, but for the purpose of general tech education the term “progressive web app”/PWA is used for websites which include a manifest for installation as a “native” app on supporting platforms, and offline functionality when used locally without a network connection. They’re “indistinguishable” from native apps because they’re basically electron for phones, except standards-based.
- tasogare 6y ago
  Next step is browsers banning some URL or IP.
awak3ning 6y ago
As someone who enjoys technology and liberty this is a very disturbing development. We do not have a well diversified portfolio of options of tools and platforms for communication due to corporations monopolizing and conspiring together to concentrate power. I do not imagine that this will end positively.
- threeseed 6y ago
  This is nonsense. Web is as open and free as it has ever been. Arguably more so given that the barrier to entry e.g. cost for creating and promoting a site has come down. And we have examples such as Parler and TheDonald.win. You just don't have a right to demand that the Facebook and Apple's of the world help to amplify your voice.
  - ng12 6y ago
    So to be clear: Facebook allowed Trump to win in 2016 but them censoring him in 2020 isn't a concerning form of censorship? I think we're past the point were we have to admit social media and the tech monopolies aren't just websites anymore.
    - loopz 6y ago
      The context is 2021 and after treason.
      - waheoo 6y ago
        Treason trials sound a lot like truth and reconciliation to me.
  - awak3ning 6y ago
    threeseed, I do not believe that you have an accurate mental model of the world or technology and social platforms in particular. It could be argued that "the web is as open and free as it ever has been", but I do not think this argument could be made honestly. Even though many of the mechanisms for accessing websites exist as they did many years ago, the "surface area" of the internet that most people are able to discover and access is significantly reduced due to search engine algorithms (which are monopolies) and advertisement allowing individuals to pay for traffic and attention. Moreover, in the present moment we are near a peak level of intrusive data collection and surveillance. Do you truly believe that the web for the average user in 2020 is as free as the web for the average user in 2000? Please give it some thought (15-30 minutes of quiet reflection) and let me know what you think.
encom 6y ago
Stallman was right.
- userbinator 6y ago
  No, he was left... and still is. More seriously, it will be curious to see what he thinks of all this recent unrest as it relates to free software and such.
  - cable2600 6y ago
    https://stallman.org/ https://stallman.org/ So far he wrote about the riots in DC by Trump supporters. He hasn't mentioned the banning of Trump on social media or Parlor from the Apple and Google stores.
the_drunkard 6y ago
This action doesn't hold up to historical treatment of other apps /platforms. Was Facebook banned from app stores when shooters live streamed on their platform? Was Twitter banned from app stores when calls for violence against Nick Sandmann were spreading? Was Youtube banned from app stores when it was discovered that child predators were lurking in the comments and exploiting underage children?
- lame-robot-hoax 6y ago
  Those sites were, or since then, have made active attempts to prevent these things from happening. Parler has no moderation and the CEO doesn’t believe they are accountable for anything that happens on or because of their app. Ergo, if I allow someone to build a bomb in the privacy of my own home, I’m not guilty because I didn’t actually build the bomb and deploy it.
- cnlwsu 6y ago
  Facebook deleted and moderated the shooters content. Twitter and youtube also both delete and moderate content that violates reasonable TOS that overlaps with apples and googles terms of service. Comparison isn’t even remotely the same. Parler had posts inciting violence and refuse to moderate
correct_horse 6y ago
The bitcoin folks correctly point out that if cash were invented today it would be made illegal. I suspect that if unmoderated conversation with strangers were invented today it would face a similar fate.
curlyQueue 6y ago
There is no argument for censorship, suspension or banning, based on our 1st amendment—- on any of the multiple platforms doing so. I came on here just to check what the “young intellectual tech” community thinks— I consider myself part of it. I’m a 20-something female, born in the heart of Silicon Valley, and have been heavily involved in tech during my short career. Heads up: This isn’t animal farm, this is 1984! I never post on here and stopped reading awhile ago due to the one-minded propaganda I consistently find on the site these days (i was a lurker a longtime before i made this account) but I feel compelled to share my opinion because these times matter, and us young (and old) folks matter. Amen and a-women? Welcome to the best addition to New Speak. Please look that up if you don’t know what it is. Have you zoomed out on how Big (and Little) Tech had subtle involvement here? And how they may be affecting how you’re thinking? I can personally say after having deleted social media for almost 2 years, and combing through different sources (time consuming)- I feel very differently now than I did four years, or eight years ago. See my links below. “I don’t like Trump” and “not being a Trump supporter,” standing behind Big Tech — the badges of honor on Hacker News. But here’s my practical advice: be very careful who you’re choosing. Everything in life is a trade off— even who’s in the White House, who’s in office, who you’re casting your votes for, the apps you use, and the companies you give your money and support to. Another piece of advice: for some laughs, and practical news these days, check out AwakenwithJP and Brett Pella :-) (seriously all their videos are pretty good, especially JP!) Another piece: Hear other perspectives “i was wrong about the Democratic Party,” Georgia H. Finally, I’ll close with this recommendation: “when the plague arrives,” NTD. Hope you hackers open your big brains, put your thinking caps on and leave confirmation bias in the past.
- fapjacks 6y ago
  Thanks for this post, and I second this Awaken with JP recommendation.

50 points by monksy 6y ago

Other validation: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.parler.parler&hl=en_US&gl=US https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.parler.par... Gone. I can't find the official statement. The tech journalist is the best I could do.

rvz 6y ago

Coordinated bans everywhere. Build your own platform they said. They'll just instruct them to download the APK on their phones instead, just like Epic games did for Fortnite. Even so, I think it will only get worse. They'll also move to encrypted chat apps instead. So when will Signal and Telegram be targeted and banned from the App Store or Google Play Store?

jjulius 6y ago
>They'll just instruct them to download the APK on their phones... I mean, they could always just open their phone's browser and go to parler.com. Apps might be gone but it's not like they're unreachable.
- waheoo 6y ago
  Yeah, should they look up "parlour website" on Google? Using Google Chrome? Or should they ask Siri and look it up on safari? Regardless, the same could be said for Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Amazon, Gmail, and countless other apps. But nobody would be cause that's just being facetious.
threeseed 6y ago
> So when will Signal and Telegram be targeted and banned They won't. Because neither is promoting the use of its platforms for illegal behaviour. Or refusing to take responsibility if such behaviour is found. Parler CEO said "I don't feel responsible for any of this and neither should the platform".
- Yetanfou 6y ago
  Twitter was and is used to coordinate illegal behaviour, the riots of last summer are a good example. When will Google and Apple ban Twitter? They won't. The question is why Twitter is allowed on these platforms but not Parler or Gab or whatever other Twitter-competitor.
  - tzs 6y ago
    Twitter moderates user content. They have suspended or banned a large number of accounts for calling for violence, or even for wishing ill upon people (e.g., a lot of people got suspended for Tweeting when Trump got COVID that they hoped he would die from it). Parler does not. There are numerous accounts on Parler calling for the killing of Pelosi, Biden, Pence, Chief Justice Roberts, assorted judges that ruled against Trump's lawsuits, state and local election officials, Republican governors and legislators who are not fighting hard enough for Trump, and numerous others. There were numerous accounts their calling for storming the Capital on January 6th and stopping the electoral vote counting using any force necessary to achieve this. In short, Twitter is not banned because Twitter tries to comply with Apple's and Google's requirements to moderate user content and remove threats of violence, and Parler is getting banned because they do not.
    - Yetanfou 6y ago
      There is a plethora of similar content to be found on Twitter so that is not the reason. The mentioned platforms also moderate user content, they just have different guidelines. Both claim to follow the law in that they take down content which violates it. Both claim that only illegal content is taken down. That is, as far as I can see, in line with the expectations for a platform to be considered a "common carrier" and as such be freed from liability for its users' content. Platforms which go beyond this by moderating on different grounds run the risk of being considered publishers and as such to be held responsible for their users' content. If Apple and Google put further demands on those platforms the question becomes who eventually is responsible for user content, this might end up being Apple and Google. That, in turn, should make developers think twice whether they benefit from being on those platforms. The alternative is to deploy to the web without any "native" apps (which often are not much more than rehashed web apps to begin with) which opens their product to a wider user base without needing to bend to the will of third parties. This would be a good thing in my opinion. The time for "native" apps has come and gone, the time for the web has been there for a long time but this might just be the push needed to convince developers to make it their prime focus. This goes especially for communications-focused products since those derive their usefulness from being connected to the 'net anyway. There is still a place for native apps - offline mapping, offline media players, hardware-interfacing apps like Wifi-scanners, step counters etc - but those tend not to be the ones which end up in hot water anyway.

lame-robot-hoax 6y ago

Oddly enough, if Storm Front tried to put an app on the Google Play Store, I don’t think many would be up in arms over it being removed. Yet when they remove an app used to coordinate the invasion of the capitol building by people with pipe bombs, molotovs, guns, zip ties, bats, etc. it’s suddenly not acceptable? An app that has people openly calling for death to US congressional leaders and the Vice President, and the president elect?

Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
If you were treated like how they are, you would be calling for violence too.
- jhk4 6y ago
  What treatment in particular do you think justifies calls for violence on the part of Trump supporters?
  - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
    Being completely robbed of an outlet for your frustrations while people call for you to be murdered on twitter. https://cdn.cnsnews.com/styles/article_big/s3/2021-01/Arthur%20Chu_1.jpg https://cdn.cnsnews.com/styles/article_big/s3/2021-01/Arthur...
    - ffs_123321 6y ago
      "Murder" by definition is an unlawful killing. When you storm the fucking Capitol building with a mob wielding deadly weapons and openly discussing hanging the Vice President, you are not protesting you are committing suicide by cop. Get your head out of your ass.
      - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
        You are generalizing all the protesters based on what some of them did. The woman who did get murdered was unarmed. And Arthur Chu isn't just talking about the people at the capitol - he's talking about all trump supporters.

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago

This is the Night of The Long Knives 2.0.

ffs_123321 6y ago
What a goddamn stupid thing that is to say. For fuck's sake.
archi42 6y ago
I am not sure how you're seriously considering this comparison. The actions by Apple, Google or Twitter are not a massacre on the political enemy (in fact, I don't consider companies to have political enemies beyond the SEC and other regulatory instances). It's not even a call to murder anyone. On the other hand, the "Nacht der Langen Dolche" was a coordinated massacre of (among others victims?) political enemies, with the goal to reinforce the political power of a discriminatory regime (which, just to be perfectly clear, was governed by an ideology that openly planned and then proceeded to kill of millions of human beings). That killing blow on the German democracy is a different league, even compared to the recent attack on democracy the world witnessed in DC (an attack on the elected representatives of the US, fueled by the elected president, so there are some parallels, but not the ones you intended to point out?). Some (imho much too large) companies getting their act together and moving in against hate speech and people outright calling for the killing of their political enemy, however, is not about murdering people. (I guess[!] it's about covering their ass, because mentioned regulatory instances will investigate why it became so easy to spread wild murder fantasies across the Internet and into the real world. With, surprise, people getting killed and democracy seriously endangered).
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  This is a coordinated silencing political enemies, with the goal to reinforce the political power of a discriminatory regime. You are banned on Twitter and Facebook, you can not have your own app, your web hosting will drop you (they call on Cloudflare to drop thedonald), they'll revoke your domains and ssl certificates... Literally giving you no options at all to speak online, CCP style. So the only difference here is that the political opponents are merely silenced instead of massacre. To think of it further, if you control all sources of information, you can not stop at silencing, no one will know if you kill them anyway - and even if they do, and somehow post about it, just write 'this has already been debunked', and a nice factcheck banner. This is an incredibly sad day for all world and a turn for the worse. You'll see.

TigeriusKirk 6y ago

I'd really hoped for de-escalation, but we're going in exactly the opposite direction.

polka_haunts_us 6y ago
This is the issue with people who believe in unilateral nuclear disarmament: what if the other side doesn't want to disarm. De-escalation takes 2, and Trump does not appear to be de-escalating.
justiceforsaas 6y ago
That's also what I thought. Instead of using fire extinguishers, FB/Apple/Google are adding more gasoline to the fire. This is going to radicalize people (especially conspiracy theorists) who now think have actual, indisputable "proof" these companies are there to get them.
- lame-robot-hoax 6y ago
  This is my main worry. I’m not worried about Parler getting taken down, they have no intrinsic right to have access to these stores hosted by private entities. They can self host, or find someone willing to host them, or implement moderation so they don’t have people calling for the death of senators on their service. But I am worried this will light a fuse towards further radicalization.
  - millzlane 6y ago
    Radicalization because they're too lazy or too dumb or whatever to create their own platform. I'd be mad too if I couldn't harass folks and spread my hate easily.
    - waheoo 6y ago
      ^ the irony
  - rvanlaar 6y ago

Acrobatic_Road 6y ago

Google and Apple just radicalized millions of people.

hadrien01 6y ago
Millions?
- bra-ket 6y ago
  74M
  - ffs_123321 6y ago
    Those people were already radicalized.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
  - twiceaday 6y ago
    This is Trump idolizing nonsense. Most people simply voted for the republican. It could have been anybody.
    - bra-ket 6y ago
      we voted against ‘liberal’ version of fascism. Unfortunately fascism won.
      - cable2600 6y ago
        You mean Social Progressivism?
        bra-ket 6y ago
        Yeah, the kind of 'progressivism' that calls for silencing all opposition through censorship, propaganda and intimidation.

holler 6y ago

Is there any argument for anti-competitive behavior here? It's weird because Google/Apple don't directly compete with Parler or other alternate social media sites, but they are clearly in the same bed with those who do, Facebook, Twitter. For instance Jack Dorsey recently admitted that his employees coordinate with employees at the other big tech companies on moderation actions. I'm just wondering what if any legal courses these actions could take?

Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
YES. Banning parler on the same day you ban Trump? This was planned and co-ordinated by Twitter and Apple. It's likely the activist group "Sleeping Giants" is involved as well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeping_Giants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeping_Giants
- 2311ski 6y ago
  It's conspiracies all the way down for you folks isn't it?
  - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
    Big Tech has collaborated to de-platform people before. Remember when Alex Jones got banned from literally everything in one day?
    - ffs_123321 6y ago
      You mean when he was illegally harassing victims of a school shooting?
      - Acrobatic_Road 6y ago
        I don't remember exactly why they did it, but they did it. So we can say that yes, big tech definitely works together to de-platform people.
    - 6y ago

LatteLazy 6y ago

Urg. Now I need to stick to my free speech principles, even though parler censors it's users and is a general shit show of self re-ebforcing misinformation and racism...

bra-ket 6y ago

US is skipping socialism on way to communism. The next logical step is isolate enemies of the people before they do further damage. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_people#Soviet_Union https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_people#Soviet_Uni...

millzlane 6y ago
The government didn't do it. Noone is arresting anyone for group think or saying what they want. People are just kicking them out of their houses. Don't like it? Build your own house, make your own rules. Fund your own cause.
- verwyrelevant 6y ago
  This comic is very relevant to your point: http://stonetoss.com/comic/build-big/ http://stonetoss.com/comic/build-big/ Don't complain when it starts happening.
  - millzlane 6y ago
    Makes sense. But mail order still exists. At least we can still say what we want to promote change without fear of arrest from our government. If the argument is just. I'm sure it will do well on it's own. Democracy isn't perfect but it's better than the alternatives.
- tasogare 6y ago
  The government doesn’t need to do it, since it has been replaced on a lot of matter by corporations. Never in history companies held that much power on people’s life. Arguing for deplatforming because "muh private" is missing the fact democracy emerged to limit the most powerful entity at the time (government). Now that companies are the most powerful element of society, their power needs to be limited as well.
  - millzlane 6y ago
    They're not the most powerful. They're just the most popular. There is a difference. They have ZERO control over your life. I know because I don't use any of them and I live just fine.

mastazi 6y ago

Lately I have discovered that progressive web apps can work quite well on mobile devices, to the point that they can be undistinguishable from native apps. I wonder if PWAs will become more common as a result of the divided political spectrum.

throw_m239339 6y ago
off topic, but as a developer, I still have not figured out what is the difference between a website and a "progressive web app". I just don't get why a bunch of different features makes websites any different. It really just sound like a marketing buzzword too me, not backed by any meaningful technical paradigm change. What makes them 'progressive'? To me the problem with webapps in general or (rich internet applications) is that the developer has very little control over caching or storage since it's very dependent on the whims of browser engine.
- postalrat 6y ago
  It's kinda like when SPAs became popular. A progressive web app is just a regular website (typically a SPA but not necessarily) that typically takes advantage of a few newer web APIs that can make it behave more native app like when those APIs are supported.
- eyelidlessness 6y ago
  Not that I want to promote getting parler on more screens, but for the purpose of general tech education the term “progressive web app”/PWA is used for websites which include a manifest for installation as a “native” app on supporting platforms, and offline functionality when used locally without a network connection. They’re “indistinguishable” from native apps because they’re basically electron for phones, except standards-based.
tasogare 6y ago
Next step is browsers banning some URL or IP.

awak3ning 6y ago

As someone who enjoys technology and liberty this is a very disturbing development. We do not have a well diversified portfolio of options of tools and platforms for communication due to corporations monopolizing and conspiring together to concentrate power. I do not imagine that this will end positively.

threeseed 6y ago
This is nonsense. Web is as open and free as it has ever been. Arguably more so given that the barrier to entry e.g. cost for creating and promoting a site has come down. And we have examples such as Parler and TheDonald.win. You just don't have a right to demand that the Facebook and Apple's of the world help to amplify your voice.
- ng12 6y ago
  So to be clear: Facebook allowed Trump to win in 2016 but them censoring him in 2020 isn't a concerning form of censorship? I think we're past the point were we have to admit social media and the tech monopolies aren't just websites anymore.
  - loopz 6y ago
    The context is 2021 and after treason.
    - waheoo 6y ago
      Treason trials sound a lot like truth and reconciliation to me.
- awak3ning 6y ago
  threeseed, I do not believe that you have an accurate mental model of the world or technology and social platforms in particular. It could be argued that "the web is as open and free as it ever has been", but I do not think this argument could be made honestly. Even though many of the mechanisms for accessing websites exist as they did many years ago, the "surface area" of the internet that most people are able to discover and access is significantly reduced due to search engine algorithms (which are monopolies) and advertisement allowing individuals to pay for traffic and attention. Moreover, in the present moment we are near a peak level of intrusive data collection and surveillance. Do you truly believe that the web for the average user in 2020 is as free as the web for the average user in 2000? Please give it some thought (15-30 minutes of quiet reflection) and let me know what you think.

encom 6y ago

Stallman was right.

userbinator 6y ago
No, he was left... and still is. More seriously, it will be curious to see what he thinks of all this recent unrest as it relates to free software and such.
- cable2600 6y ago
  https://stallman.org/ https://stallman.org/ So far he wrote about the riots in DC by Trump supporters. He hasn't mentioned the banning of Trump on social media or Parlor from the Apple and Google stores.

the_drunkard 6y ago

This action doesn't hold up to historical treatment of other apps /platforms. Was Facebook banned from app stores when shooters live streamed on their platform? Was Twitter banned from app stores when calls for violence against Nick Sandmann were spreading? Was Youtube banned from app stores when it was discovered that child predators were lurking in the comments and exploiting underage children?

lame-robot-hoax 6y ago
Those sites were, or since then, have made active attempts to prevent these things from happening. Parler has no moderation and the CEO doesn’t believe they are accountable for anything that happens on or because of their app. Ergo, if I allow someone to build a bomb in the privacy of my own home, I’m not guilty because I didn’t actually build the bomb and deploy it.
cnlwsu 6y ago
Facebook deleted and moderated the shooters content. Twitter and youtube also both delete and moderate content that violates reasonable TOS that overlaps with apples and googles terms of service. Comparison isn’t even remotely the same. Parler had posts inciting violence and refuse to moderate

correct_horse 6y ago

The bitcoin folks correctly point out that if cash were invented today it would be made illegal. I suspect that if unmoderated conversation with strangers were invented today it would face a similar fate.

curlyQueue 6y ago

There is no argument for censorship, suspension or banning, based on our 1st amendment—- on any of the multiple platforms doing so. I came on here just to check what the “young intellectual tech” community thinks— I consider myself part of it. I’m a 20-something female, born in the heart of Silicon Valley, and have been heavily involved in tech during my short career. Heads up: This isn’t animal farm, this is 1984! I never post on here and stopped reading awhile ago due to the one-minded propaganda I consistently find on the site these days (i was a lurker a longtime before i made this account) but I feel compelled to share my opinion because these times matter, and us young (and old) folks matter. Amen and a-women? Welcome to the best addition to New Speak. Please look that up if you don’t know what it is. Have you zoomed out on how Big (and Little) Tech had subtle involvement here? And how they may be affecting how you’re thinking? I can personally say after having deleted social media for almost 2 years, and combing through different sources (time consuming)- I feel very differently now than I did four years, or eight years ago. See my links below. “I don’t like Trump” and “not being a Trump supporter,” standing behind Big Tech — the badges of honor on Hacker News. But here’s my practical advice: be very careful who you’re choosing. Everything in life is a trade off— even who’s in the White House, who’s in office, who you’re casting your votes for, the apps you use, and the companies you give your money and support to. Another piece of advice: for some laughs, and practical news these days, check out AwakenwithJP and Brett Pella :-) (seriously all their videos are pretty good, especially JP!) Another piece: Hear other perspectives “i was wrong about the Democratic Party,” Georgia H. Finally, I’ll close with this recommendation: “when the plague arrives,” NTD. Hope you hackers open your big brains, put your thinking caps on and leave confirmation bias in the past.

fapjacks 6y ago
Thanks for this post, and I second this Awaken with JP recommendation.