15 ms·
I'm not gonna lie: I find it very difficult to be upset by this when the site was a haven for people who want to mass executions for people like me. For me, the
by nkrisc 6y ago
I'm not gonna lie: I find it very difficult to be upset by this when the site was a haven for people who want to mass executions for people like me. For me, the world is a little more complex than "privacy at all costs." It's hard to decide where to draw the line.
- LunaSea 6y agoI would set the line at "following due process".
- sanedigital 6y agoTalk about hyperbole. In no way did even 1% of the population on Parler want mass executions for people like you.
- muspimerol 6y agoThere's no hyperbole in the comment. It can still be a safe haven for extremists even if most of the users are not.
- simonh 6y agoAn even if they didn't agree with the sentiment, many or even most of those on the platform were perfectly happy to fraternise with those that did.
- whimsicalism 6y agoShould we still have due process in the external world? After all, the United States is a "safe haven" for people who talk about killing pretty much every minority group under the sun. > the world is a little more complex than "privacy at all costs." The line doesn't have to do with the infringement of privacy, it's about whether that infringement is being done by publicly sanctioned power, or the whim of the arbitrary, domineering power of private (tech) actors. Elizabeth Anderson has written quite well on this topic in "Private Government."
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- sanedigital 6y agoThat applies equally to the rest of the internet.
- estomagordo 6y agoSo let's start by looking at Hacker News. Where on HN can we see people plotting mass executions like that?
- dx87 6y agoIn the initial post about the Capitol being shut down,t here were people saying that everyone who broke into the capitol building needed to be tried for treason and executed, or saying that the police should have opened fire and killed anyone who broke in. The mods removed the comments, but HN isn't some paragon of virtue that isn't susceptible to the same calls for violence as any other site.
- wetmore 6y agoMods removing those comments sort of proves that HN isn't a safe haven for the calls for violence.
- sanedigital 6y agoThose comments and posts are removed from Parler as well: https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/09/politics/parler-lin-wood-mike-pence/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/09/politics/parler-lin-wood-...
- muspimerol 6y agoNo, not really. It comes down to how you define "safe haven" - if violent groups are actively moderated and banned, then I don't think it can be called a safe haven. How does the rest of the internet equate to Parler in this respect?
- makeworld 6y agoHow do you know?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- ipsocannibal 6y agoData, evidence? The threat is in giving the fascist terrorist 1% a microphone not that the other 99% happen to be listening. Parler was lax in policing that 1%.
- whimsicalism 6y agoAnd thus the private messages/videos of all should be leaked by vigilantes? I am equally concerned about what happened about the Capitol, but the actions taken by tech in response are unacceptable to me.
- ipsocannibal 6y agoYou just jumped to a conclusion. In another comment in this article I specifically said only messages that are related to the commission of a crime should be released and everything else should be deleted.
- brigandish 6y ago> The threat is in giving the fascist terrorist 1% a microphone The problem with fascist terrorists is not their rhetoric, it's their violence. Allow them to speak their mind and you lower their need for violent action and everyone else gets to show that their ideas are horribly flawed. It's amusing to think that people seriously believe there are huge swathes of people just ripe to become neo-nazis because someone gave a rousing speech or wrote some tweets - how do you manage not to succumb to these rhetorical titans?
- marcinzm 6y ago>It's amusing to think that people seriously believe there are huge swathes of people just ripe to become neo-nazis because someone gave a rousing speech or wrote some tweets - how do you manage not to succumb to these rhetorical titans? Given that exactly this happened 90 years ago and caused the deaths of tens of millions, people are needless to say cautious.
- 6y ago
- VikingCoder 6y agoAccording to Wikipedia, there are 4,000,000 active Parler users. You think you can assert with confidence that there are not 40,000 people with Parler accounts who want mass executions? I'd like to think you're right, but I'm not as confident as you are. Not after watching someone beat a Capitol Police officer to death with a flag pole flying the American Flag. People think they are defending their country against evil. Like me, apparently. How many QAnon followers are there? How many believe the most outrageous claims? I would not be surprised if 40,000 do. Would you?
- Anon1096 6y agoFWIW Wikipedia lists that number of users as of November 2020. It had a huge influx of users in December and obviously January, to the point that it was number 1 in the App Store before it got pulled. So the 4MM user number is probably very off.
- sanedigital 6y agoThe data is public now—if you're so certain, go find me a single post on Parler calling for mass executions.
- marcinzm 6y agohttps://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/09/us/arkansas-police-resigns-parler.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/09/us/arkansas-police-resign...
- pavel_lishin 6y agoBut for the people that did, it was absolutely a haven.
- nkrisc 6y agoI don't know what people think, we can't read their minds. All I know is if you wanted to find people who want mass executions in the US, Parler would be a safe place to find them, based on what we do know about them.
- cbozeman 6y agoWhat are "people like you"? Facebook and Twitter have millions of people who want mass executions for all kinds of groups, a quick trip into Muslim areas of both services and you'll find moderate and right-wing versions that want execution for LGBTQ+ people. You can find the same desire for marginalization and extermination of other groups. Not every language and dialect has a huge team of moderators that review content and take the appropriate punitive action against malicious users. I have a Parler account. I have a GAB account. I make accounts on all new social media platforms and communications services. Everyone should. Because you have no idea what platform might be the next Facebook, or which one is going to be the next MySpace.
- mike00632 6y agoParler will not be the next Twitter.
- tw04 6y agoI hear this a lot, but it makes no logical sense to me. I see a site that is (in)famous for being full of self-proclaimed right-wing "patriots" who are calling for violence against people due to political beliefs. Someone then decide to associate with these people by joining the site. They may not personally post messages calling for violence, but are now associated with them. And the response is: well sure I'm in the group but I don't actually agree with any of this. Then my question is: why did you join in the first place? If you don't agree with the most vocal 1% (I SERIOUSLY doubt that number after spending time perusing the site), and you don't denounce what they're saying, what do you expect others to think? We're supposed to read your mind that you're part of a "silent dissent" and just joined the site because...? People were banned from facebook and twitter for calling for violence, if you switched sites specifically to follow that person I have a REAL tough time believing you don't support them.
- sanedigital 6y agoHave to been on Reddit, specifically /r/politics? There are calls to violence all the time. Nobody bats an eye because it's calls to violence against the "bad guys."
- tw04 6y agoI assume you've got some citations for that, right? I have been to r/politics and people get banned pretty quickly for calling for violence. I just went through the top 20 threads, and there isn't a single call for violence to be found.
- brandmeyer 6y agoIndeed. When evaluating reddit threads and content, its important to distinguish between highly upvoted and visible content, and content that was downvoted or deleted to oblivion. A -1000 call for violence in one subreddit is not equivalent to a +1000 call for violence in another.
- themaninthedark 6y agoI am not going to go through and find some examples but there have been calls for violence there. I remember the entire Sandman period of time with many people saying he "what a punchable face".... Edit to add: Also what happens behind doors on invite only subreddits? Edit to add further: https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitPoliticsSays/comments/bmtdqb/chapotraphouse_users_calling_for_violence_amidst/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ShitPoliticsSays/comments/bmtdqb/ch... CHapoTrapHouse got banned but....CTH is invite only.
- nfRfqX5n 6y agohere's nearly 1% of (4mm estimated active) upvoting something similar though: /r/ParlerWatch/comments/ktwmje/this_is_the_type_of_free_speech_parler_accepts/
- sanedigital 6y agoThat statement—while absolutely and undeniably abhorrent—is not even remotely calling for mass executions, or even mass violence, against anybody.
- adrr 6y agoWe have the data. That would be easy to prove what percentage of active users called for violence both in public and private messages.
- gooseus 6y agoMy impressions is that everyone whinging about privacy with regards to giving seditionists and terrorists a space to coordinate and share misinformation after the biggest attack on the US since 9/11 are just being contrarian or are absolutist to a fault in their libertarian ideals (which I mostly share). People minimizing this attack and not treating it like a legitimate 9/11 scale crisis for the US are not considering the propaganda win this is for extremist groups domestically and autocratic regimes internationally. Could this be a slippery slope? Sure, but it's not as slippery as the other side of the slope which goes right off a cliff. There is still plenty of time/space to have debates about how to move forward from here with moderation and privacy on social networks, but for now we are in the middle of an insurrection that needs to be put down. Also, should another attack take place couldn't platforms knowingly providing services to the capitol attackers find themselves liable for providing material support for terrorists? If I were managing risk at AWS that definitely be a major concern. My POV, if we wouldn't have a problem doing it to ISIS after an attack on our Capitol, then we shouldn't have problem doing the same to QAnon and these "patriots".
- chmod600 6y agoWhere you are going wrong is that none of what you say demands a hack or a data dump. Get warrants, subpoenas, etc., and go after those inciting riots/sedition.
- jaywalk 6y ago> the biggest attack on the US since 9/11 This is an absolutely disgusting and disgraceful thing to say.
- gooseus 6y agoSo you can name a bigger attack on the US that has happened in the last 20 years? Far fewer lives were lost, but the impact and implications of this are on par.
- whimsicalism 6y agoThey're just not even remotely the same thing. Nothing like 9/11 or the OKC bombing has happened in the last 19 years; full stop. I have lived in DC my whole life, I hate to see this happening in my city, but we can be honest with ourselves.
- fasdf1122 6y agoorange man bad
- tedjdziuba 6y agoTwitter is a haven for the "kill all white people" and "Republicans all deserve to die" supporters.
- sn 6y agoI also fall in the category of parler "was a haven for people who want mass executions for people like me." I still think it's wrong to leak the data. Many of these people use twitter and gmail too - does that justify a leak from those services? If not, why not? There were and are legal means for law enforcement to access that data if they need to.
- nkrisc 6y agoFor what it's worth, I don't think that it is ok. I'm just acknowledging the conflict of feeling bad for innocents caught up in this and being glad that some real bad actors might be exposed.