8 ms·

I poked around on it some, and noticed something ... disturbing. I saw what I assumed were bots posting a lot of garbage links to 'articles' like "Obama compou

I poked around on it some, and noticed something ... disturbing. I saw what I assumed were bots posting a lot of garbage links to 'articles' like "Obama compound raided!" and "8 Democrats switch to Republican Party" (that actually happened in Feb 2020, but the link was to an undated rerun and the link was posted.. 2 days ago?). The links were to such trustworthy sites as 'firstusanews.us' (made up, but all variants like that), and they all would throw "update your flash player!" malware popups. Next to each of these links on Parler were view counts - 207, 412, 897, etc - of people who'd clicked the link to view the article. I could not reply to the link with a comment like "this has malware" because... my account was not verified. Only 'badged/verified' accounts can comment on 'links'. AND... the only way to get 'badged' is to use the mobile app and take a picture of govt ID (driver license, passport, etc). This becomes incredibly lopsided "free speech" biased against moderating/critical voices. It was literally a field day for bots to post malware garbage and have thousands of victims per day, and no ability for people to warn others. On one 'article' I followed there were comments from people saying "I don't understand how Parler works" in the comments on the linked article. Indeed...

explorigin 6y ago
I was also curious about Parler but, when going to sign up, it asked for my phone number. Ummmm, no thank you. That kind of association is like going to a protest with your cellphone. Pretty easy to get the wrong kind of association attached to you.
- sigotirandolas 6y ago
  I was able to sign up recently with a throwaway e-mail address and made up phone number. But I was also surprised it asked for it.
  - mgkimsal 6y ago
    I 'signed up' on the desktop version, but you can't the 'verify/badge' stuff is only available via the mobile app, AFAICT.
    - sigotirandolas 6y ago
      I used the mobile app to sign up. However, I just signed up to lurk (Streisand effect), so I can't tell if the fake mail+phone allowed me to post/comment.
- Kaze404 6y ago
  > That kind of association is like going to a protest with your cellphone. Pretty easy to get the wrong kind of association attached to you. "We're in! We're in! Derrick Evans is in the Capitol!" https://www.businessinsider.com/derrick-evans-capitol-siege-republican-west-virginia-video-facebook-stream-2021-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/derrick-evans-capitol-siege-...
  - vijaybritto 6y ago
    I had a good laugh looking at that :D
- frogpelt 6y ago
  Does your choice of words cause you to pause and think about where we are as a society? The "wrong kind of association" for creating a social media account?
  - no-dr-onboard 6y ago
    Unlikely, but I'm certainly not one to say. Perhaps another question to ask would be, "How fair is it that others are pigeonholed to platforms like this and undoubtedly get the "wrong kind of association"? Are we reducing certain thoughts, beliefs and, dare I say, questions indiscriminately down to "crimethink"?
    - MartinCron 6y ago
      Unless you're WAY outside the political mainstream, you aren't pigeonholed into platforms like this. And if you are that far outside the political mainstream, holding thoughts and beliefs like "six million wasn't enough" then how much sympathy am I supposed to have?
  - Jochim 6y ago
    Should it? Society has always judged or kept an eye on people based on who they choose to associate with. If you were active on VK or WeChat I'm sure the government would have a few questions to ask you if you applied for a position requiring clearance. Beyond that, if a platform is known for encouraging behaviour that you and your peers disapprove of. It might make sense for you to avoid registering there in case your peers get the wrong impression of you should the information leak. While not exactly social media, you only need to look at the fallout from Ashley Madison for why you might not want to sign up somewhere because of "the wrong kind of association". Why social media would be the only forum exempt from this line of thinking I can't imagine.
    - frogpelt 6y ago
      No, you're right. I am fully on-board with the idea of being careful about who and what I associate with as it relates to maintaining personal integrity and character. I guess I was approaching that question from a different angle where "wrong kind of association" was from the perspective of Big Brother. So I probably made an incorrect assumption about what the parent comment intended.
- macinjosh 6y ago
  > Pretty easy to get the wrong kind of association attached to you. How sad is it that our free society has turned into this? So much for tolerance.
  - Jochim 6y ago
    This isn't new. McCarthyism is the example almost everyone knows.
cabalamat 6y ago
> the only way to get 'badged' is to use the mobile app and take a picture of govt ID (driver license, passport, etc). Some people have argued, based on this, that Parler was set up by the NSA to get data on people. Hoovering up data from social media is certainly the sort of thing the NSA would do.
- ChrisKnott 6y ago
  This suggestion doesn't stand up to a moment's scrutiny. Do you really think the best way for a government agency to access government IDs is to secretly run a Twitter clone?
  - cipherboy 6y ago
    I believe OP is more insinuating that the combination of (ip, user identity {username, cell number, real-world identity}) is an attractive data source for such an agency. Of course they already have all government IDs. But tying it to a username helps correlate data across other services, and additionally if the user checks from mobile phone or other device, tying it to recent IPs could also be useful. OPSec could prevent some of that, but how many users are doing that? Just a thought. Not an endorsement.
    - cogman10 6y ago
      Seems like scaring away people by asking for cell numbers and photo ids goes too far. The IP address would give the FBI/NSA everything they need to track down an individual's household. After that, it'd be a simple case of monitoring them to figure out who the extremist is. To me, the more realistic (and scary!) explanation is this thing is just one huge identity theft machine.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - vergessenmir 6y ago
    I certainly agree that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. To suggest that setting up a honeypot to have fringe elements actively expose their views in what they deem as a safe environment is not outside of what security agency may do is a bit of stretch It's a interesting thought to entertain but Parler is most likely not this.
munificent 6y ago
> the only way to get 'badged' is to use the mobile app and take a picture of govt ID (driver license, passport, etc). <puts on tinfoil hat> Maybe the entire site is just an FBI honeypot for right-wing extremists? (It's obviously not an NSA honeypot, because they could afford to self-host.)
- shagie 6y ago
  With a double lawyer of tinfoil you can ask "maybe the site is just a honeypot for a foreign government?"
  - marz0 6y ago
    This twitter thread[1] suggests that it's possible. But probably best to take it with a grain of salt. [1] https://twitter.com/davetroy/status/1327253991936454663 https://twitter.com/davetroy/status/1327253991936454663
jelliclesfarm 6y ago
parler sounds like a classic honeypot
- mywittyname 6y ago
  It's interesting how the natural inclination of the folks drawn to this kind of product leads to them being willing to provide a lot more personal information than they otherwise would to other similar platforms.
  - mgkimsal 6y ago
    I'm not 100% sure on that. I saw a lot of 'non-badged' accounts, meaning they weren't providing much info. I guess, though, presumably many (most?) were providing real phone numbers, but Twitter tries to force that from people, so perhaps not much more than Twitter?
astura 6y ago
The idea Parler is a "free speech" platform or "unbiased" is a lie, in actuality its just a "safe space" for far right provokers. Users have been reporting they're been banned for posting leftist content or for criticism of Parler itself. If they were so concerned with "freedom" why would they have the following in their terms of use? “Parler may remove any content and terminate your access to the Services at any time and for any reason.”
im3w1l 6y ago
I was never on Parler even to check so I don't know as much as you about the situation, but isn't ID requirement normally a way to combat bots? Maybe it just backfired in this case?

explorigin 6y ago

I was also curious about Parler but, when going to sign up, it asked for my phone number. Ummmm, no thank you. That kind of association is like going to a protest with your cellphone. Pretty easy to get the wrong kind of association attached to you.

sigotirandolas 6y ago
I was able to sign up recently with a throwaway e-mail address and made up phone number. But I was also surprised it asked for it.
- mgkimsal 6y ago
  I 'signed up' on the desktop version, but you can't the 'verify/badge' stuff is only available via the mobile app, AFAICT.
  - sigotirandolas 6y ago
    I used the mobile app to sign up. However, I just signed up to lurk (Streisand effect), so I can't tell if the fake mail+phone allowed me to post/comment.
Kaze404 6y ago
> That kind of association is like going to a protest with your cellphone. Pretty easy to get the wrong kind of association attached to you. "We're in! We're in! Derrick Evans is in the Capitol!" https://www.businessinsider.com/derrick-evans-capitol-siege-republican-west-virginia-video-facebook-stream-2021-1 https://www.businessinsider.com/derrick-evans-capitol-siege-...
- vijaybritto 6y ago
  I had a good laugh looking at that :D
frogpelt 6y ago
Does your choice of words cause you to pause and think about where we are as a society? The "wrong kind of association" for creating a social media account?
- no-dr-onboard 6y ago
  Unlikely, but I'm certainly not one to say. Perhaps another question to ask would be, "How fair is it that others are pigeonholed to platforms like this and undoubtedly get the "wrong kind of association"? Are we reducing certain thoughts, beliefs and, dare I say, questions indiscriminately down to "crimethink"?
  - MartinCron 6y ago
    Unless you're WAY outside the political mainstream, you aren't pigeonholed into platforms like this. And if you are that far outside the political mainstream, holding thoughts and beliefs like "six million wasn't enough" then how much sympathy am I supposed to have?
- Jochim 6y ago
  Should it? Society has always judged or kept an eye on people based on who they choose to associate with. If you were active on VK or WeChat I'm sure the government would have a few questions to ask you if you applied for a position requiring clearance. Beyond that, if a platform is known for encouraging behaviour that you and your peers disapprove of. It might make sense for you to avoid registering there in case your peers get the wrong impression of you should the information leak. While not exactly social media, you only need to look at the fallout from Ashley Madison for why you might not want to sign up somewhere because of "the wrong kind of association". Why social media would be the only forum exempt from this line of thinking I can't imagine.
  - frogpelt 6y ago
    No, you're right. I am fully on-board with the idea of being careful about who and what I associate with as it relates to maintaining personal integrity and character. I guess I was approaching that question from a different angle where "wrong kind of association" was from the perspective of Big Brother. So I probably made an incorrect assumption about what the parent comment intended.
macinjosh 6y ago
> Pretty easy to get the wrong kind of association attached to you. How sad is it that our free society has turned into this? So much for tolerance.
- Jochim 6y ago
  This isn't new. McCarthyism is the example almost everyone knows.

cabalamat 6y ago

> the only way to get 'badged' is to use the mobile app and take a picture of govt ID (driver license, passport, etc). Some people have argued, based on this, that Parler was set up by the NSA to get data on people. Hoovering up data from social media is certainly the sort of thing the NSA would do.

ChrisKnott 6y ago
This suggestion doesn't stand up to a moment's scrutiny. Do you really think the best way for a government agency to access government IDs is to secretly run a Twitter clone?
- cipherboy 6y ago
  I believe OP is more insinuating that the combination of (ip, user identity {username, cell number, real-world identity}) is an attractive data source for such an agency. Of course they already have all government IDs. But tying it to a username helps correlate data across other services, and additionally if the user checks from mobile phone or other device, tying it to recent IPs could also be useful. OPSec could prevent some of that, but how many users are doing that? Just a thought. Not an endorsement.
  - cogman10 6y ago
    Seems like scaring away people by asking for cell numbers and photo ids goes too far. The IP address would give the FBI/NSA everything they need to track down an individual's household. After that, it'd be a simple case of monitoring them to figure out who the extremist is. To me, the more realistic (and scary!) explanation is this thing is just one huge identity theft machine.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- vergessenmir 6y ago
  I certainly agree that it doesn't hold up to scrutiny. To suggest that setting up a honeypot to have fringe elements actively expose their views in what they deem as a safe environment is not outside of what security agency may do is a bit of stretch It's a interesting thought to entertain but Parler is most likely not this.

munificent 6y ago

> the only way to get 'badged' is to use the mobile app and take a picture of govt ID (driver license, passport, etc). <puts on tinfoil hat> Maybe the entire site is just an FBI honeypot for right-wing extremists? (It's obviously not an NSA honeypot, because they could afford to self-host.)

shagie 6y ago
With a double lawyer of tinfoil you can ask "maybe the site is just a honeypot for a foreign government?"
- marz0 6y ago
  This twitter thread[1] suggests that it's possible. But probably best to take it with a grain of salt. [1] https://twitter.com/davetroy/status/1327253991936454663 https://twitter.com/davetroy/status/1327253991936454663

jelliclesfarm 6y ago

parler sounds like a classic honeypot

mywittyname 6y ago
It's interesting how the natural inclination of the folks drawn to this kind of product leads to them being willing to provide a lot more personal information than they otherwise would to other similar platforms.
- mgkimsal 6y ago
  I'm not 100% sure on that. I saw a lot of 'non-badged' accounts, meaning they weren't providing much info. I guess, though, presumably many (most?) were providing real phone numbers, but Twitter tries to force that from people, so perhaps not much more than Twitter?

astura 6y ago

The idea Parler is a "free speech" platform or "unbiased" is a lie, in actuality its just a "safe space" for far right provokers. Users have been reporting they're been banned for posting leftist content or for criticism of Parler itself. If they were so concerned with "freedom" why would they have the following in their terms of use? “Parler may remove any content and terminate your access to the Services at any time and for any reason.”

im3w1l 6y ago

I was never on Parler even to check so I don't know as much as you about the situation, but isn't ID requirement normally a way to combat bots? Maybe it just backfired in this case?