12 ms·

The purge has been happening for years. I hate how people on HN is praising this. There are literally few alternatives for the average person apart from Google

The purge has been happening for years. I hate how people on HN is praising this. There are literally few alternatives for the average person apart from Google and eyeProducts. I have a PinePhone, but what percentage of America can truly put in the effort to use one? <1%. If you cannot install an run your own software on a device, you do not own the device. You cannot praise the removal of Gab or Parlor now and complain later when they take everything else from you. They can increase the Apple developer fees whenever they want. What happens when they start charging you $2,000 a year or $4,000 a year for the right to publish apps? What happens when the two big platforms decide no one can push an app unless their platform has full moderation. What happens when Google and Apple, for your safety, say all user contributed content must go through their "spam" filter first for any apps? This is horrific. You may not like Parlor, but it will not stop here. This is a dangerous place we are in and we should all be horrified by it. People are horrified right now, but they're focused on the wrong thing.

chrispeel 6y ago
Nonsense This is the free market in action. No one is forcing Google or Twitter or FB to do anything; I think they've been very restrained. The libertarians should be happy that it's commercial companies shutting Parler down and not govt. It's only when the president incites violence in an attempt retain power that these commercial entities acted.
- ptero 6y ago
  Once a company is so big that its refusal to support a small business is a major hit, that company cannot operate in a wild west style. That's why most countries have anti-monopoly laws; and it's long past the time when those laws should have been applied to google.
  - chrispeel 6y ago
    In case you didn't notice, there are already anti-trust lawsuits against Google; I'm happy that such inspection of big tech is happening. Even so, that's a separate issue
    - ptero 6y ago
      When a company (or two) gets a near-monopoly on a distribution channel, bans are no longer a business issue. We banned X becomes much more important than "because of Y" part, which can always be made up and is pretty weak in the case of parler.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
  They may be able to do it legally and it would still be wrong thing to do. Queue discussion about "Google or Twitter or FB" having it both ways as publisher and platform. Parler is not going to be shut down now. Whoever made this decision, just literally gave them Trump base users on a silver platter.
manfredo 6y ago
I think one potentially positive outcome is increased knowledge of side-loading apps. Granted, this really only exists as an option on Android but Fortnite demonstrated the feasibility of this approach. If side-loaded apps gain traction it might break the Google Play store monopoly.
- H8crilA 6y ago
  This is a pretty likely outcome - fracture. And certainly wouldn't be the worst for the Internet. What if the same happens to the Union ...
  - manfredo 6y ago
    I'm not sure if a fractured internet is more likely to lead to a fractured Union as compared to an internet were a substantial segment of the population feels suppressed. I highly doubt that these bans are going to be effective in terms of curbing undesirable communication. On the other hand, I am confident that they will reinforce perceptions of biased and uneven enforcement. I am also particularly worried that politicians will use the threat of regulation to coerce companies into suppressing political opponents' messages. The government can't directly ban speech, but if they can intimidate platforms into censuring political opponents they will have achieved the same effect. Better, in fact, because the politicians' agency in this censorship is not visible.
billylindeman 6y ago
Agreed, its horrific. This is an act of great escalation in an already dicey situation. I hope I'm wrong when I say this will likely beget more violence.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
How can the bans (being de-platformed) be more horrific than the actual violence that's occurred?
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
  Easy. Tech giants have means to control all public speech and information exchange. -> they ally with political party -> ensure they win elections, fairly or whatever, no one will be able to tell the story that votes are counted unfairly -> install an unremovable authoritarian dictatorship. Which might have imitation elections & stuff, just like USSR had. And then, 'correction' camps for people that do not fully fit this new beautiful society.
  - JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
    How much insurrection is acceptable before the tradeoff of a 'new beautiful society' is the better deal? Both sound like bad outcomes. Neither sounds obviously superior.
    - PHGamer 6y ago
      the insurrection is the political classes fault! if they hadnt shown the right that they were ok with burning cities the right wouldnt have had enough and actually did something. Sure the political class is going to make examples because this wasnt approved like the other but now their own words are getting thrown at them. granted a civil war will make the soviet collapse look like a cakewalk so im not preaching for that but holy damn. and it doesnt help this censorship means 40% of the country will think there is indeed a conspiracy now and will cause more unrest which will cause more more tyranny which will cause more unrest which causes a giant feedback loop. the higher ups literally are meeting their destiny by trying to avoid it. this could very well not end well.
  - MrRiddle 6y ago
    That’s just the start. We’ll start seeing tech giants introduce “Partner API” for allied political parties in other countries. And soon enough there will be a world centralized government.
neaden 6y ago
I can't imagine the world where you are less horrified by the literal neo Nazis storming the US capital then an app getting kicked off google play store. People are dead, get some perspective.
- Barrin92 6y ago
  >I can't imagine the world this is the world of techbro-ism with people making 200k per year living in sheltered neighbourhoods, more concerned about their online speech than having a boot on their neck. It's actually completely in line with the audience of this site the literally most upvoted comment is some random rant about the 'great purge' let that sink in.
  - brigandish 6y ago
    Did the “literal neo Nazis” prevail? How many of them were there? “No” and “not many” are the answers so the comparison with widespread attacks on millions of people’s hard won freedoms are (or should be) definitely more of a concern to wider society.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
  You have lost a sense of perspective. People storming the capital was symbolic act ( with some violence ). Move by Google will likely have repercussions beyond that violence and that storm. Some of us horrified, because that song is always the same.
  - neaden 6y ago
    It was not a symbolic act, it literally happened. People literally died. By people who are literally neo Nazis who literally think I should be murdered, who literally had zip ties and the police are now finding literal pipe bombs. I assure you I am not the one who lost perspective.
    - A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
      "Nazis who literally think I should be murdered" I disagree. I may be wrong, but it would appear that you feel personally attacked. I am not sure how people storming capital AND fighting cops AND leaving pipe bombs in said building want to kill you specifically. I do not see the connection. Are you a staffer/lawmaker/cop there or something? I recognize that tensions are high, but shouting "literally neo Nazis" is not a great argument in US for a variety of reasons ( not completely unlike antisemitism, it lost some of its punch ).
pjc50 6y ago
Other way round: anyone on the left is used to unfair treatment. The app reporting drone strike locations was banned years ago. Apple caused tumblr to self-destruct. Just this time the policy is actually in our favor. Unlimited incitement to violence is not sustainable. Banning them for this is the start; America is going to have a long uncomfortable process of dealing with its media.
- nnspired 6y ago
  The start of being banned for wrongthink you mean. It is coming down the line.
- flunhat 6y ago
  Exactly -- I love the pearl-clutching tone of these of slippery-slope complaints: "Just you wait, leftists! One day the power of the state shall be visited upon you, and then you'll see! How would you feel if the government censored you, infiltrated your gatherings, and sidelined you from mainstream society? Hmmmmm?"
  - savanaly 6y ago
    So what's the argument you're making? That that was all ok? Are they hypocritical and correct, or non-hypocritical and wrong?
  - djsumdog 6y ago
    > pearl-clutching Pearl clutching? Odd. I've heard people say that all summer long about those afraid of the "peaceful protests" turned violent riots that burned down cities and devastated business. This violence was encouraged by all types of politicians on the left and all the big media networks as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQzLcO5qhY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQzLcO5qhY A small number of people at an almost entirely non-violent rally, a rally where the president encouraged people to "walk down to the capitol house" .. walk, not riot or loot or burn, a small number of people did something horrifically stupid. Most just walked around, a smaller percentage destroyed stuff. Everyone one of them should be charged if they did. But you know what I also saw? "Pearl Clutching." Every senator and congressman afraid out of their mind because the villages had come into the castle. The peasants were in the kings court, and the village idiot with a racoon on his head was sitting at the seat of The King's Hand playing with her royal gavel. You cannot possibly talk about the violence on the 6th, without addressing the fact that the media went on and on and on about praising all the violent "peaceful protestors" all summer long. It did not matter at all when it was the business owners, the minimum wages workers who lost the jobs at stores now condemned, or those losing everything in lockdowns while Pelosi showed America her ice cream collection in her $14k kitchen setup. But now that they were causing some minor damage, 1/1000 of the damage the democratic left supporters did on inauguration day 2014: https://youtu.be/BXR3d22BhHs https://youtu.be/BXR3d22BhHs It's suddenly the worst thing on the planet! Unprecedented even! America has a long history of its citizens taking federal buildings. The Black Panthers, with an armed militia, took the California Capitol in the 1970s and no one died.
valuearb 6y ago
If you must have a native mobile app, you can download it from alternative stores. Or Parlour can just distribute as a web app. Businesses don’t have any right to force other businesses to carry their products.
- PurpleFoxy 6y ago
  This is a big point. I feel it’s acceptable for google to remove whatever they want because android allows you to install the apk directly. IMO apple should either be forced to allow side loading apps or to accept everything within reason to the App Store.
  - jfk13 6y ago
    And who is the arbiter of "within reason"?
    - PurpleFoxy 6y ago
      For me it would just be “complies with the laws of the country” An acceptable compromise I think would be to have unlisted apps that can’t be found on the top charts or in search but can be installed via the App Store with a link.
  - sirius87 6y ago
    And if installation of apks from unknown sources goes away because some nasty malware exploits it or other security excuse becomes available? Hard not to be alarmed by the pattern here.
    - Izkata 6y ago
      Samsung does (or at least did) lock down their Android phones like that. They had to be rooted to get third-party APKs installed.
      - d3nj4l 6y ago
cardamomo 6y ago
> If you cannot install an run your own software on a device, you do not own the device. I agree with this, and your analysis of the inaccessible cost of those devices people truly can own and control. However, I do not think this is an accurate parallel to the many horrifying political events of this week.
syndacks 6y ago
First, this is strawman bullshit. Don't bring up app prices in a culture war. What you're witnessing is culture expressing itself, rooted in history, the law, the zeitgeist of the people. And right now the culture is drawing a line in the sand and saying, "don't do that (bigotry, racism, ignorance)". You are free to be on this side of the line or you can start a revolution. So far the good guys are winning. Not Dems or Republicans, but sane people.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- bobcallme 6y ago
  Fuck you and everyone here. The fact that anyone could defend this decision is ridiculous. I'm tired of people defending censorship in the most brain dead of ways when it has never worked in the past and it most certainly will not work now. Censoring unpopular ideas only allows them to fester in the dark where they can't be brought to light or addressed in the open. This was never about "racism","bigotry" or "ignorance". We are in this boat because of a much deeper set of problems that are currently going to lead to the further regression of society. Those in power, people here and the arrogance of many others have created an entire generation of people who've been banished, shunned or shouted down any time they had a differing opinion on anything. I personally am done dealing with this bullshit and the problems that have been inflicted on society. I'm done being quiet and, personally, I'd rather join the damned than continue this circus. I'm willing to put everything on the table to end this and ensure that this will never happen again. EVERYONE deserves a voice and a platform; you are more than free to not listen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
  - winston_smith 6y ago
    Take a deep breath and step away for a minute. You're not alone, and lots of other people right here in this thread are also opposed to censorship. Dying on a hill isn't what we need, and in fact given that you're here, you're probably uniquely qualified to help in the great effort of building the next generation of censorship-resistant technology. Haters gonna hate, but coders gonna code. It'll take time, but we've succeeded before and we'll succeed again.
modriano 6y ago
Are you at all worried about the possibility that America could have another civil war because a sufficiently large proportion of Americans are radicalized in uncensored, insufficiently moderated communities? Facebook's own research found “64% of all extremist group joins are due to our recommendation tools” and that most of the activity came from the platform’s “Groups You Should Join” and “Discover” algorithms: “Our recommendation systems grow the problem.” [0] We just suffered a textbook seditious conspiracy against the United States, which was planned on Parler and thedonald dot win. Is there a chance that Google's decision to remove Parler from their app store will only throttle the spread of Parler? Have you heard of the slippery slope fallacy? [1] And if so, why doesn't the prohibition of apps for child pornography produce the harms you cite? [0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499 https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-di... [1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/
- throwawaysea 6y ago
  Why do you think there was a seditious conspiracy? Do you really honestly believe that a few hundred people marching onto the capitol have the ability to destabilize the country? Remember, we have layers upon layers of armed forces that would end any such attempt very very easily. I think this incident was more realistically just a bunch of amped up protesters who got caught up in the moment and crossed a physical barrier, but had no greater ambition of taking over the US government. Not to mention, this is not the first time rioters have taken over capitol hill while Congress has gathered. It has happened over and over many times, even in the past few years. Which of the following events did you see broad front-page coverage of, along with censorship/deplatforming on social media, and calls for resignation/expulsion of politicians: Was it the capitol riot that AOC directly participated in (https://theintercept.com/2018/11/13/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-sunrise-activists-nancy-pelosi/ https://theintercept.com/2018/11/13/alexandria-ocasio-cortez...)? Perhaps it was the repeated incidents after AOC and Rashida Tlaib both encouraged this group to continue illegal rioting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_Movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_Movement)? Or the several past Capitol Hill riots staged by Democracy Spring (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Spring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Spring)? Or perhaps the Obamacare riots (https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/10/politics/health-care-protests-capitol-hill/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/10/politics/health-care-protests...)? Or maybe when 600 people raided capitol hill to protest immigration law (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/womens-march-protesters-call-end-family-separation-capitol/story?id=56240419 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/womens-march-protesters-call...)? The reality is none of them resulted in any consequences for the activists, affiliated politicians, or organizations that either organized/led/incited those riots. After all, AOC is still here on Twitter/Instagram/whatever. The same thing happened throughout 2020. Rose City Antifa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_City_Antifa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_City_Antifa) organized numerous highly violent riots at federal buildings in Portland - guess what, their Twitter account (https://twitter.com/RoseCityAntifa https://twitter.com/RoseCityAntifa) still stands. BLM-affiliated events have caused billions in damage, and resulted in a far greater number of deaths - shouldn't they be deplatformed as well? The tech companies making these changes at the eleventh hour is simply them pandering to the incoming administration (their new masters) and them finally caving in to their own political biases and putting their immense, unchecked power to use by attacking and suppressing their political enemies. It's a dark, dark day and like in all such catastrophes, it'll be welcomed with open arms.
usrusr 6y ago
> If you cannot install an run your own software on a device, you do not own the device. ADB doesn't require individual clearance from Google, you can install any apk you like. In fact you don't even need ADB, you can just install an apk downloaded from the web if you uncheck "only verified sources" in settings. Google is merely removing Play Store convenience (and distribution channel safety). Providing that Play Store convenience costs them real dollars for computing resources and they chose to not do that anymore for the app in question.
adkadskhj 6y ago
I disagree. This is great, because it illustrates the problem you're citing. Without this use case people won't realize why open source matters, or phones without control matters, etcetc. While i don't agree with Trump or his party actions, this definitely is waking thousands of people up to how easily even Americans are censored. This realization is crucial to privacy focused applications, imo.
- krspykrm 6y ago
  Agree with this. Everyone who was never dependent on FAANG in the first place because of tinfoil Stallmanism is now sitting back roasting their marshmellows as the rest of society burns. Either you control your device, or your device will be used to control you.
bitwize 6y ago
> I hate how people on HN is praising this. In most countries in the world, you can go to jail for saying the wrong thing. This includes countries which are, for all practical purposes, freer than the USA -- like Germany, which hasn't renazified since WWII in part because of its hate speech laws. So no, not everybody recognizes that unfettered expression is a universal good. There are places which have already experienced the danger of free-speech absolutism.
- roenxi 6y ago
  > Germany, which hasn't renazified since WWII in part because of its hate speech laws. The US has a number of troops stationed in Germany comparable to the German army. The ideology of Germany has not been left to chance at any point after WWII. That probably isn't the model that most people look for in their own country's governance.
heavyset_go 6y ago
Where were all of the free speech absolutists a decade ago when Twitter, Facebook and Google started removing Islamic content from their platforms under the guise of dealing with extremist content? I seem to recall them cheering those companies on.
AsyncAwait 6y ago
I haven't seen the right screaming when there's Republican legislators passing anti-BDS legislation all over. That's the purest form of censorship targeting primarily people on the left and yet crickets. Maybe the so called free speech absolutists are not as principled as they say.
LdSGSgvupDV 6y ago
The way to fight with Fascism is to be Fascism.

chrispeel 6y ago

Nonsense This is the free market in action. No one is forcing Google or Twitter or FB to do anything; I think they've been very restrained. The libertarians should be happy that it's commercial companies shutting Parler down and not govt. It's only when the president incites violence in an attempt retain power that these commercial entities acted.

ptero 6y ago
Once a company is so big that its refusal to support a small business is a major hit, that company cannot operate in a wild west style. That's why most countries have anti-monopoly laws; and it's long past the time when those laws should have been applied to google.
- chrispeel 6y ago
  In case you didn't notice, there are already anti-trust lawsuits against Google; I'm happy that such inspection of big tech is happening. Even so, that's a separate issue
  - ptero 6y ago
    When a company (or two) gets a near-monopoly on a distribution channel, bans are no longer a business issue. We banned X becomes much more important than "because of Y" part, which can always be made up and is pretty weak in the case of parler.
A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
They may be able to do it legally and it would still be wrong thing to do. Queue discussion about "Google or Twitter or FB" having it both ways as publisher and platform. Parler is not going to be shut down now. Whoever made this decision, just literally gave them Trump base users on a silver platter.

manfredo 6y ago

I think one potentially positive outcome is increased knowledge of side-loading apps. Granted, this really only exists as an option on Android but Fortnite demonstrated the feasibility of this approach. If side-loaded apps gain traction it might break the Google Play store monopoly.

H8crilA 6y ago
This is a pretty likely outcome - fracture. And certainly wouldn't be the worst for the Internet. What if the same happens to the Union ...
- manfredo 6y ago
  I'm not sure if a fractured internet is more likely to lead to a fractured Union as compared to an internet were a substantial segment of the population feels suppressed. I highly doubt that these bans are going to be effective in terms of curbing undesirable communication. On the other hand, I am confident that they will reinforce perceptions of biased and uneven enforcement. I am also particularly worried that politicians will use the threat of regulation to coerce companies into suppressing political opponents' messages. The government can't directly ban speech, but if they can intimidate platforms into censuring political opponents they will have achieved the same effect. Better, in fact, because the politicians' agency in this censorship is not visible.

billylindeman 6y ago

Agreed, its horrific. This is an act of great escalation in an already dicey situation. I hope I'm wrong when I say this will likely beget more violence.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago

How can the bans (being de-platformed) be more horrific than the actual violence that's occurred?

Andrew_nenakhov 6y ago
Easy. Tech giants have means to control all public speech and information exchange. -> they ally with political party -> ensure they win elections, fairly or whatever, no one will be able to tell the story that votes are counted unfairly -> install an unremovable authoritarian dictatorship. Which might have imitation elections & stuff, just like USSR had. And then, 'correction' camps for people that do not fully fit this new beautiful society.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
  How much insurrection is acceptable before the tradeoff of a 'new beautiful society' is the better deal? Both sound like bad outcomes. Neither sounds obviously superior.
  - PHGamer 6y ago
    the insurrection is the political classes fault! if they hadnt shown the right that they were ok with burning cities the right wouldnt have had enough and actually did something. Sure the political class is going to make examples because this wasnt approved like the other but now their own words are getting thrown at them. granted a civil war will make the soviet collapse look like a cakewalk so im not preaching for that but holy damn. and it doesnt help this censorship means 40% of the country will think there is indeed a conspiracy now and will cause more unrest which will cause more more tyranny which will cause more unrest which causes a giant feedback loop. the higher ups literally are meeting their destiny by trying to avoid it. this could very well not end well.
- MrRiddle 6y ago
  That’s just the start. We’ll start seeing tech giants introduce “Partner API” for allied political parties in other countries. And soon enough there will be a world centralized government.

neaden 6y ago

I can't imagine the world where you are less horrified by the literal neo Nazis storming the US capital then an app getting kicked off google play store. People are dead, get some perspective.

Barrin92 6y ago
>I can't imagine the world this is the world of techbro-ism with people making 200k per year living in sheltered neighbourhoods, more concerned about their online speech than having a boot on their neck. It's actually completely in line with the audience of this site the literally most upvoted comment is some random rant about the 'great purge' let that sink in.
- brigandish 6y ago
  Did the “literal neo Nazis” prevail? How many of them were there? “No” and “not many” are the answers so the comparison with widespread attacks on millions of people’s hard won freedoms are (or should be) definitely more of a concern to wider society.
A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
You have lost a sense of perspective. People storming the capital was symbolic act ( with some violence ). Move by Google will likely have repercussions beyond that violence and that storm. Some of us horrified, because that song is always the same.
- neaden 6y ago
  It was not a symbolic act, it literally happened. People literally died. By people who are literally neo Nazis who literally think I should be murdered, who literally had zip ties and the police are now finding literal pipe bombs. I assure you I am not the one who lost perspective.
  - A4ET8a8uTh0 6y ago
    "Nazis who literally think I should be murdered" I disagree. I may be wrong, but it would appear that you feel personally attacked. I am not sure how people storming capital AND fighting cops AND leaving pipe bombs in said building want to kill you specifically. I do not see the connection. Are you a staffer/lawmaker/cop there or something? I recognize that tensions are high, but shouting "literally neo Nazis" is not a great argument in US for a variety of reasons ( not completely unlike antisemitism, it lost some of its punch ).

pjc50 6y ago

Other way round: anyone on the left is used to unfair treatment. The app reporting drone strike locations was banned years ago. Apple caused tumblr to self-destruct. Just this time the policy is actually in our favor. Unlimited incitement to violence is not sustainable. Banning them for this is the start; America is going to have a long uncomfortable process of dealing with its media.

nnspired 6y ago
The start of being banned for wrongthink you mean. It is coming down the line.
flunhat 6y ago
Exactly -- I love the pearl-clutching tone of these of slippery-slope complaints: "Just you wait, leftists! One day the power of the state shall be visited upon you, and then you'll see! How would you feel if the government censored you, infiltrated your gatherings, and sidelined you from mainstream society? Hmmmmm?"
- savanaly 6y ago
  So what's the argument you're making? That that was all ok? Are they hypocritical and correct, or non-hypocritical and wrong?
- djsumdog 6y ago
  > pearl-clutching Pearl clutching? Odd. I've heard people say that all summer long about those afraid of the "peaceful protests" turned violent riots that burned down cities and devastated business. This violence was encouraged by all types of politicians on the left and all the big media networks as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQzLcO5qhY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1eQzLcO5qhY A small number of people at an almost entirely non-violent rally, a rally where the president encouraged people to "walk down to the capitol house" .. walk, not riot or loot or burn, a small number of people did something horrifically stupid. Most just walked around, a smaller percentage destroyed stuff. Everyone one of them should be charged if they did. But you know what I also saw? "Pearl Clutching." Every senator and congressman afraid out of their mind because the villages had come into the castle. The peasants were in the kings court, and the village idiot with a racoon on his head was sitting at the seat of The King's Hand playing with her royal gavel. You cannot possibly talk about the violence on the 6th, without addressing the fact that the media went on and on and on about praising all the violent "peaceful protestors" all summer long. It did not matter at all when it was the business owners, the minimum wages workers who lost the jobs at stores now condemned, or those losing everything in lockdowns while Pelosi showed America her ice cream collection in her $14k kitchen setup. But now that they were causing some minor damage, 1/1000 of the damage the democratic left supporters did on inauguration day 2014: https://youtu.be/BXR3d22BhHs https://youtu.be/BXR3d22BhHs It's suddenly the worst thing on the planet! Unprecedented even! America has a long history of its citizens taking federal buildings. The Black Panthers, with an armed militia, took the California Capitol in the 1970s and no one died.

valuearb 6y ago

If you must have a native mobile app, you can download it from alternative stores. Or Parlour can just distribute as a web app. Businesses don’t have any right to force other businesses to carry their products.

PurpleFoxy 6y ago
This is a big point. I feel it’s acceptable for google to remove whatever they want because android allows you to install the apk directly. IMO apple should either be forced to allow side loading apps or to accept everything within reason to the App Store.
- jfk13 6y ago
  And who is the arbiter of "within reason"?
  - PurpleFoxy 6y ago
    For me it would just be “complies with the laws of the country” An acceptable compromise I think would be to have unlisted apps that can’t be found on the top charts or in search but can be installed via the App Store with a link.
- sirius87 6y ago
  And if installation of apks from unknown sources goes away because some nasty malware exploits it or other security excuse becomes available? Hard not to be alarmed by the pattern here.
  - Izkata 6y ago
    Samsung does (or at least did) lock down their Android phones like that. They had to be rooted to get third-party APKs installed.
    - d3nj4l 6y ago

cardamomo 6y ago

> If you cannot install an run your own software on a device, you do not own the device. I agree with this, and your analysis of the inaccessible cost of those devices people truly can own and control. However, I do not think this is an accurate parallel to the many horrifying political events of this week.

syndacks 6y ago

First, this is strawman bullshit. Don't bring up app prices in a culture war. What you're witnessing is culture expressing itself, rooted in history, the law, the zeitgeist of the people. And right now the culture is drawing a line in the sand and saying, "don't do that (bigotry, racism, ignorance)". You are free to be on this side of the line or you can start a revolution. So far the good guys are winning. Not Dems or Republicans, but sane people.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
bobcallme 6y ago
Fuck you and everyone here. The fact that anyone could defend this decision is ridiculous. I'm tired of people defending censorship in the most brain dead of ways when it has never worked in the past and it most certainly will not work now. Censoring unpopular ideas only allows them to fester in the dark where they can't be brought to light or addressed in the open. This was never about "racism","bigotry" or "ignorance". We are in this boat because of a much deeper set of problems that are currently going to lead to the further regression of society. Those in power, people here and the arrogance of many others have created an entire generation of people who've been banished, shunned or shouted down any time they had a differing opinion on anything. I personally am done dealing with this bullshit and the problems that have been inflicted on society. I'm done being quiet and, personally, I'd rather join the damned than continue this circus. I'm willing to put everything on the table to end this and ensure that this will never happen again. EVERYONE deserves a voice and a platform; you are more than free to not listen. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_...
- winston_smith 6y ago
  Take a deep breath and step away for a minute. You're not alone, and lots of other people right here in this thread are also opposed to censorship. Dying on a hill isn't what we need, and in fact given that you're here, you're probably uniquely qualified to help in the great effort of building the next generation of censorship-resistant technology. Haters gonna hate, but coders gonna code. It'll take time, but we've succeeded before and we'll succeed again.

modriano 6y ago

Are you at all worried about the possibility that America could have another civil war because a sufficiently large proportion of Americans are radicalized in uncensored, insufficiently moderated communities? Facebook's own research found “64% of all extremist group joins are due to our recommendation tools” and that most of the activity came from the platform’s “Groups You Should Join” and “Discover” algorithms: “Our recommendation systems grow the problem.” [0] We just suffered a textbook seditious conspiracy against the United States, which was planned on Parler and thedonald dot win. Is there a chance that Google's decision to remove Parler from their app store will only throttle the spread of Parler? Have you heard of the slippery slope fallacy? [1] And if so, why doesn't the prohibition of apps for child pornography produce the harms you cite? [0] https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-division-top-executives-nixed-solutions-11590507499 https://www.wsj.com/articles/facebook-knows-it-encourages-di... [1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/fallacies/

throwawaysea 6y ago
Why do you think there was a seditious conspiracy? Do you really honestly believe that a few hundred people marching onto the capitol have the ability to destabilize the country? Remember, we have layers upon layers of armed forces that would end any such attempt very very easily. I think this incident was more realistically just a bunch of amped up protesters who got caught up in the moment and crossed a physical barrier, but had no greater ambition of taking over the US government. Not to mention, this is not the first time rioters have taken over capitol hill while Congress has gathered. It has happened over and over many times, even in the past few years. Which of the following events did you see broad front-page coverage of, along with censorship/deplatforming on social media, and calls for resignation/expulsion of politicians: Was it the capitol riot that AOC directly participated in (https://theintercept.com/2018/11/13/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-sunrise-activists-nancy-pelosi/ https://theintercept.com/2018/11/13/alexandria-ocasio-cortez...)? Perhaps it was the repeated incidents after AOC and Rashida Tlaib both encouraged this group to continue illegal rioting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_Movement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_Movement)? Or the several past Capitol Hill riots staged by Democracy Spring (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Spring https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Spring)? Or perhaps the Obamacare riots (https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/10/politics/health-care-protests-capitol-hill/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/10/politics/health-care-protests...)? Or maybe when 600 people raided capitol hill to protest immigration law (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/womens-march-protesters-call-end-family-separation-capitol/story?id=56240419 https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/womens-march-protesters-call...)? The reality is none of them resulted in any consequences for the activists, affiliated politicians, or organizations that either organized/led/incited those riots. After all, AOC is still here on Twitter/Instagram/whatever. The same thing happened throughout 2020. Rose City Antifa (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_City_Antifa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rose_City_Antifa) organized numerous highly violent riots at federal buildings in Portland - guess what, their Twitter account (https://twitter.com/RoseCityAntifa https://twitter.com/RoseCityAntifa) still stands. BLM-affiliated events have caused billions in damage, and resulted in a far greater number of deaths - shouldn't they be deplatformed as well? The tech companies making these changes at the eleventh hour is simply them pandering to the incoming administration (their new masters) and them finally caving in to their own political biases and putting their immense, unchecked power to use by attacking and suppressing their political enemies. It's a dark, dark day and like in all such catastrophes, it'll be welcomed with open arms.

usrusr 6y ago

> If you cannot install an run your own software on a device, you do not own the device. ADB doesn't require individual clearance from Google, you can install any apk you like. In fact you don't even need ADB, you can just install an apk downloaded from the web if you uncheck "only verified sources" in settings. Google is merely removing Play Store convenience (and distribution channel safety). Providing that Play Store convenience costs them real dollars for computing resources and they chose to not do that anymore for the app in question.

adkadskhj 6y ago

I disagree. This is great, because it illustrates the problem you're citing. Without this use case people won't realize why open source matters, or phones without control matters, etcetc. While i don't agree with Trump or his party actions, this definitely is waking thousands of people up to how easily even Americans are censored. This realization is crucial to privacy focused applications, imo.

krspykrm 6y ago
Agree with this. Everyone who was never dependent on FAANG in the first place because of tinfoil Stallmanism is now sitting back roasting their marshmellows as the rest of society burns. Either you control your device, or your device will be used to control you.

bitwize 6y ago

> I hate how people on HN is praising this. In most countries in the world, you can go to jail for saying the wrong thing. This includes countries which are, for all practical purposes, freer than the USA -- like Germany, which hasn't renazified since WWII in part because of its hate speech laws. So no, not everybody recognizes that unfettered expression is a universal good. There are places which have already experienced the danger of free-speech absolutism.

roenxi 6y ago
> Germany, which hasn't renazified since WWII in part because of its hate speech laws. The US has a number of troops stationed in Germany comparable to the German army. The ideology of Germany has not been left to chance at any point after WWII. That probably isn't the model that most people look for in their own country's governance.

heavyset_go 6y ago

Where were all of the free speech absolutists a decade ago when Twitter, Facebook and Google started removing Islamic content from their platforms under the guise of dealing with extremist content? I seem to recall them cheering those companies on.

AsyncAwait 6y ago

I haven't seen the right screaming when there's Republican legislators passing anti-BDS legislation all over. That's the purest form of censorship targeting primarily people on the left and yet crickets. Maybe the so called free speech absolutists are not as principled as they say.

LdSGSgvupDV 6y ago

The way to fight with Fascism is to be Fascism.