5 ms·

"But private services are free to operate by different rules." But that's just it, isn't it? Parler tried to make a new service that plays by a new set of rule

"But private services are free to operate by different rules." But that's just it, isn't it? Parler tried to make a new service that plays by a new set of rules. And they were crushed, because it turns out that you actually can't have your own rules unless you are already at the scale of Apple, AWS, etc.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mrguyorama 6y ago
Yes. If I try to run a business selling klan robes, and word gets out, I might find I no longer have any willing fabric suppliers. That's not an infringement on my rights, that's the free market at work
- chmod600 6y ago
  I didn't say it was illegal or an infringement of Constitutional rights. But it is pretty worrying. Before this, the power was somewhat theoretical and used in tiny marginal cases. Now, it's proven that they can effectively exercise the power in a major way, and that's news.
  - CarelessExpert 6y ago
    > Now, it's proven that they can effectively exercise the power in a major way, and that's news. Honestly, it's really not. We've seen groups like ISIS kicked off social media, for example, and no one blinked an eye. Heck, Milo Yiannopoulos was deplatformed way back in 2016. The thing that's news is that a significant percentage of a major US political party is now associated with a form of right wing extremism and wrapped up in a major conspiracy theory movement whose adherents are willing to commit violence in an attempt to subvert an election.
CarelessExpert 6y ago
> But that's just it, isn't it? Parler tried to make a new service that plays by a new set of rules. And they were crushed, because it turns out that you actually can't have your own rules unless you are already at the scale of Apple, AWS, etc. That's not at all true. If I recall the same thing happened to 8chan/8kun. Yet somehow they live on. If Parler has a market, they'll find a way. That said, it sucks but, well, that's capitalism for ya. What else would you suggest? Regulating these various companies such that the government gets to decide who can use their services? Because if so, a) that would require new laws, b) it'd probably fall afoul of the first amendment, and c) it doesn't seem to align well with free market conservative ideology, and so should be opposed by the very users of Parler that are being affected by this.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mrguyorama 6y ago

Yes. If I try to run a business selling klan robes, and word gets out, I might find I no longer have any willing fabric suppliers. That's not an infringement on my rights, that's the free market at work

chmod600 6y ago
I didn't say it was illegal or an infringement of Constitutional rights. But it is pretty worrying. Before this, the power was somewhat theoretical and used in tiny marginal cases. Now, it's proven that they can effectively exercise the power in a major way, and that's news.
- CarelessExpert 6y ago
  > Now, it's proven that they can effectively exercise the power in a major way, and that's news. Honestly, it's really not. We've seen groups like ISIS kicked off social media, for example, and no one blinked an eye. Heck, Milo Yiannopoulos was deplatformed way back in 2016. The thing that's news is that a significant percentage of a major US political party is now associated with a form of right wing extremism and wrapped up in a major conspiracy theory movement whose adherents are willing to commit violence in an attempt to subvert an election.

CarelessExpert 6y ago

> But that's just it, isn't it? Parler tried to make a new service that plays by a new set of rules. And they were crushed, because it turns out that you actually can't have your own rules unless you are already at the scale of Apple, AWS, etc. That's not at all true. If I recall the same thing happened to 8chan/8kun. Yet somehow they live on. If Parler has a market, they'll find a way. That said, it sucks but, well, that's capitalism for ya. What else would you suggest? Regulating these various companies such that the government gets to decide who can use their services? Because if so, a) that would require new laws, b) it'd probably fall afoul of the first amendment, and c) it doesn't seem to align well with free market conservative ideology, and so should be opposed by the very users of Parler that are being affected by this.