4 ms·

I mean you can't run a site with no censorship where people are openly plotting the violent takeover of the us government and/or violent events. It is just a li

by pfisch 6y ago

I mean you can't run a site with no censorship where people are openly plotting the violent takeover of the us government and/or violent events. It is just a liability issue. This isn't some kind of censorship issue, that just isn't legal and never has been legal.

LatteLazy 6y ago
The great irony here is Parler DOES engage in loads of censorship (no parody, no Pro-Cannabis comments, no positive antifa comments, I don't think you can even be left wing on there). So I'm stuck defending a censorous site against censorship!? I am a weirdo, because a public site like Parler is exactly where I hope insurrection should be planned. Why wasn't the FBI ready to swoop and arrest actual violent people given they were posting their plans in plane view? Why are we relying on AWS to moderate away trumps lies and fix the US Political landscape? To me, killing parler (for all its shit-ness), is a perfect example of "we have to do something, and this is something". Does anyone actually think that if Parler had gone offline 4 weeks ago, the events of the last week would have been different? They'd have planned on twitter or Facebook or reddit or wherever. When can we solve the actual problems here (failure to deal with trump, a poor relationship with the truth for all politicians, law enforcement complete lack of interest in right wing threats, lack of basic security etc)? Censoring random websites seems like farting in a Jucuzzi, censorship is almost always a way of ignoring actual problems while pretending you are acting. And here we are again. Sorry, its late here in the UK and I'm ranting. Thanks for reading.
- pfisch 6y ago
  I think widespread suppression of information about this planned protest would've mattered, but I don't think it was justified before the events at the capitol. Now I think it is a clear and easily foreseeable risk to allow this to continue.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    I'm all for arresting anyone who plans specific violence. Before/after the events at the capital, I don't care. Go arrest them. Banning one site just moves them to another and gives them a persecution complex. 12months in prison for conspiracy to commit public disorder is a much better deterant for future planned insurrections.
    - pfisch 6y ago
      So we should be referring everyone making idle threats on the internet to law enforcement? That seems unrealistic and honestly way more totalitarian than just moderation and censorship. I also don't think law enforcement has the bandwidth to deal with it.
      - LatteLazy 6y ago
        If someone makes a specific threat, yes. Then when they get 50 referrals from r/knitting and 50mil from parlar, law enforcement can raise an eyebrow, investigate and prevent these things. To me, that seems fair and effective. The alternative is that we ban parlar. But only after the violence. And we know that banning parlar won't prevent this from happening, we're just moving the problem. Why bother? Keep parler, by now every second account should an FBI agent. It's even better than twitter/reddit/facebook: all the noise is gone, it's just the crazies planning violence...
- randallsquared 6y ago
  > Why wasn't the FBI ready to swoop and arrest actual violent people given they were posting their plans in plane view? I assume because the vast majority of such posts were and are fantasies masquerading as plans, and there aren't the resources to set up stings for each such "plan".
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    Edit: this is a snarky comment and I should have been polite. I wasn't. I apologise. Original comment: Turns out the resources were just the price of a plane ticket to Washington...
    - randallsquared 6y ago
      That sure is pithy, but it doesn't make any sense unless you're suggesting that there was only one public plan for what people were going to do on the 6th, right? While I haven't looked for them, I would be very surprised if that was the case.
      - LatteLazy 6y ago
        Yeah, sorry, pithy is me being snarky really. That was cheap of me and I apologise. Actually that is what I'm saying. Was the average insurrectionist more planning than that in this case? I know some bombs were found, leaving them out this seems like a mob with guns. They coordinated the date and location and just winged it from there it seems. If someone has a complex plan, you can't be sure they'll go through with it till they've taken significant action. If the plan is "meet in Washington on Tuesday, bring a gun so we can shoot democrats,see you there" then it seems you can arrest that plotter as soon as he has a gun and a plane ticket. I think so many people either have public profiles or wore ID or literally spelt their name out to reporters, they can't have been actual planning, prepared criminals. Edit: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/10/us/politics/capitol-arrests.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/10/us/politics/capitol-arres... I picked the above up, it seems like 2 people Brough zip ties to take prisoners. 2 more were in possession of firearms when arrested. That's the level of planning with these people, most of them seem to have just turned up. I'm not at all saying that excuses their actions. Quite the opposite: it brings the bar for actual conspiracy down when the crime is simple.
- pfisch 6y ago
  When they stopped filming people streaking on sports fields it stopped happening. When school shooters get tons of media coverage school shootings go up. Same with suicides. People don't like to think that censorship works, but the truth is that censorship does work a lot of the time.
  - LatteLazy 6y ago
    I can see some argument for that. But It still makes no sense to ban parler. And you now need to filter the content of all media to prevent those people getting publicity elsewhere. So is that the plan? Keep parler but install censors there AND in every website mod office, newspaper, TV station and radio studio? That's a lot of work. When we could just put FBI agents on parler and have them prevent crimes with conspiracy charges. And you still can't actually justify a ban on parler.
    - cygx 6y ago
      Note that the alternative would be forcing private companies to do business with a party they do not want to do business with. That has its own set of issues.
      - LatteLazy 6y ago
        You're right and it does. But we do already do that with (other) utilities: the power company can't cut off the supply to the local KKK office as long as they're operating legally and they pay their bills. This is the price we pay for an open society. Freedom means freedom for morons as well as for us. I wish there were an easier answer, but I wouldn't even trust myself with the power to decide who is allowed to speak and who isn't, so I won't trust Amazon Web Services PR department. So no one gets the job and sometimes that stinks.
        cygx 6y ago
        So are you arguing for declaring cloud computing platforms public utilities?
j8hn 6y ago
According to the Washington Post, a lot of the planning was done on Facebook and Twitter. Edit: Interesting that researchers made their findings public weeks before this event that there was specific violence was planned to storm the Capitol. Source: Originally published in the Washington Post. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/capitol-siege-was-planned-online-trump-supporters-are-planning-the-next-one/ https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/capitol-siege-was-...

by pfisch 6y ago

LatteLazy 6y ago

The great irony here is Parler DOES engage in loads of censorship (no parody, no Pro-Cannabis comments, no positive antifa comments, I don't think you can even be left wing on there). So I'm stuck defending a censorous site against censorship!? I am a weirdo, because a public site like Parler is exactly where I hope insurrection should be planned. Why wasn't the FBI ready to swoop and arrest actual violent people given they were posting their plans in plane view? Why are we relying on AWS to moderate away trumps lies and fix the US Political landscape? To me, killing parler (for all its shit-ness), is a perfect example of "we have to do something, and this is something". Does anyone actually think that if Parler had gone offline 4 weeks ago, the events of the last week would have been different? They'd have planned on twitter or Facebook or reddit or wherever. When can we solve the actual problems here (failure to deal with trump, a poor relationship with the truth for all politicians, law enforcement complete lack of interest in right wing threats, lack of basic security etc)? Censoring random websites seems like farting in a Jucuzzi, censorship is almost always a way of ignoring actual problems while pretending you are acting. And here we are again. Sorry, its late here in the UK and I'm ranting. Thanks for reading.

pfisch 6y ago
I think widespread suppression of information about this planned protest would've mattered, but I don't think it was justified before the events at the capitol. Now I think it is a clear and easily foreseeable risk to allow this to continue.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  I'm all for arresting anyone who plans specific violence. Before/after the events at the capital, I don't care. Go arrest them. Banning one site just moves them to another and gives them a persecution complex. 12months in prison for conspiracy to commit public disorder is a much better deterant for future planned insurrections.
  - pfisch 6y ago
    So we should be referring everyone making idle threats on the internet to law enforcement? That seems unrealistic and honestly way more totalitarian than just moderation and censorship. I also don't think law enforcement has the bandwidth to deal with it.
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      If someone makes a specific threat, yes. Then when they get 50 referrals from r/knitting and 50mil from parlar, law enforcement can raise an eyebrow, investigate and prevent these things. To me, that seems fair and effective. The alternative is that we ban parlar. But only after the violence. And we know that banning parlar won't prevent this from happening, we're just moving the problem. Why bother? Keep parler, by now every second account should an FBI agent. It's even better than twitter/reddit/facebook: all the noise is gone, it's just the crazies planning violence...
randallsquared 6y ago
> Why wasn't the FBI ready to swoop and arrest actual violent people given they were posting their plans in plane view? I assume because the vast majority of such posts were and are fantasies masquerading as plans, and there aren't the resources to set up stings for each such "plan".
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  Edit: this is a snarky comment and I should have been polite. I wasn't. I apologise. Original comment: Turns out the resources were just the price of a plane ticket to Washington...
  - randallsquared 6y ago
    That sure is pithy, but it doesn't make any sense unless you're suggesting that there was only one public plan for what people were going to do on the 6th, right? While I haven't looked for them, I would be very surprised if that was the case.
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      Yeah, sorry, pithy is me being snarky really. That was cheap of me and I apologise. Actually that is what I'm saying. Was the average insurrectionist more planning than that in this case? I know some bombs were found, leaving them out this seems like a mob with guns. They coordinated the date and location and just winged it from there it seems. If someone has a complex plan, you can't be sure they'll go through with it till they've taken significant action. If the plan is "meet in Washington on Tuesday, bring a gun so we can shoot democrats,see you there" then it seems you can arrest that plotter as soon as he has a gun and a plane ticket. I think so many people either have public profiles or wore ID or literally spelt their name out to reporters, they can't have been actual planning, prepared criminals. Edit: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/10/us/politics/capitol-arrests.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/10/us/politics/capitol-arres... I picked the above up, it seems like 2 people Brough zip ties to take prisoners. 2 more were in possession of firearms when arrested. That's the level of planning with these people, most of them seem to have just turned up. I'm not at all saying that excuses their actions. Quite the opposite: it brings the bar for actual conspiracy down when the crime is simple.
pfisch 6y ago
When they stopped filming people streaking on sports fields it stopped happening. When school shooters get tons of media coverage school shootings go up. Same with suicides. People don't like to think that censorship works, but the truth is that censorship does work a lot of the time.
- LatteLazy 6y ago
  I can see some argument for that. But It still makes no sense to ban parler. And you now need to filter the content of all media to prevent those people getting publicity elsewhere. So is that the plan? Keep parler but install censors there AND in every website mod office, newspaper, TV station and radio studio? That's a lot of work. When we could just put FBI agents on parler and have them prevent crimes with conspiracy charges. And you still can't actually justify a ban on parler.
  - cygx 6y ago
    Note that the alternative would be forcing private companies to do business with a party they do not want to do business with. That has its own set of issues.
    - LatteLazy 6y ago
      You're right and it does. But we do already do that with (other) utilities: the power company can't cut off the supply to the local KKK office as long as they're operating legally and they pay their bills. This is the price we pay for an open society. Freedom means freedom for morons as well as for us. I wish there were an easier answer, but I wouldn't even trust myself with the power to decide who is allowed to speak and who isn't, so I won't trust Amazon Web Services PR department. So no one gets the job and sometimes that stinks.
      - cygx 6y ago
        So are you arguing for declaring cloud computing platforms public utilities?

j8hn 6y ago

According to the Washington Post, a lot of the planning was done on Facebook and Twitter. Edit: Interesting that researchers made their findings public weeks before this event that there was specific violence was planned to storm the Capitol. Source: Originally published in the Washington Post. https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/capitol-siege-was-planned-online-trump-supporters-are-planning-the-next-one/ https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/capitol-siege-was-...