3 ms·
In this case you had people with flags bearing a specific person’s name on them. Certainly muting the only person bearing that name will have a direct effect.
by lovecg 6y ago
In this case you had people with flags bearing a specific person’s name on them. Certainly muting the only person bearing that name will have a direct effect.
- AnthonyMouse 6y agoThe direct effect being that the bulk of the people on the other side of the isle lose the last shred of respect for these institutions, and switch to or create other sites, causing each side to become part of a permanent echo chamber with a mutually irreconcilable set of accepted facts that cause members of the different groups to come into violent disagreement whenever they encounter one another in physical reality. I thought the goal was supposed to be to do something that reduced the probability of violent conflict?
- lovecg 6y agoYou’re underestimating the value of immediate, global, and easily accessible coordination. Trump can try to build his own Twitter but it’s nowhere near the trivial proposition you’re making it out to be. Without this coordination mechanism the mob becomes headless and decentralized.
- AnthonyMouse 6y agoThe hardest part about creating your own Twitter is convincing enough people to switch at once to create a critical mass. Transferring the sitting President of the United States and several other prominent members of his party at the same time in a very public way is exactly how you induce that to happen. That Parler thing was temporarily offline under the load of all the new users. That's not the problem you have when you're having the actual problem of convincing enough people to switch.
- lovecg 6y agoThat’s one thing that’s hard about it. Scaling and running the service reliably is far from trivial and this tends to be severely underestimated by “let’s just build a competitor” crowd.
- Kim_Bruning 6y agohttps://parler.com/ https://parler.com/ Didn't everyone move to Parler?
- jantap 6y agothat aged like fine milk
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago> Scaling and running the service reliably is far from trivial and this tends to be severely underestimated by “let’s just build a competitor” crowd. This is not a trivial problem, but it's also not one that hasn't been solved a hundred times before, and seems to be something they've already handled. But I also want to put something in juxtaposition here. You have on the one hand the argument that this isn't censorship because they're a private company and you can just make your own. On the other hand, the argument that booting them off is useful because making your own is impractical and they'll fail. If one is true then the other isn't, right?