4 ms·

According to this, both Twitter and Facebook use aws: https://www.contino.io/insights/whos-using-aws https://www.contino.io/insights/whos-using-aws There have

According to this, both Twitter and Facebook use aws: https://www.contino.io/insights/whos-using-aws https://www.contino.io/insights/whos-using-aws There have been a lot of livestreams and general calls of hate and violence on those social media sites from all political spectrums. Where are their bans? That's why theres an uproar. New York Times, A Genocide Incited on Facebook, With Posts From Myanmar’s Military https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebook-genocide.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/technology/myanmar-facebo... Pretty sure that can be considered violence. I think I feel that way due to the genocide part. Where's Facebook's ban? Oh wait, that's right, big tech is it's own good ol'boys club.

Maken 6y ago
Facebook and Twitter have evident moderation (if maybe insufficient) working on removing or flagging such calls to violence. The argument of this case is not about whether there were user messages calling for execution of public figures, it's about whether Parler did anything about it.
gfodor 6y ago
The argument is Facebook and Twitter are doing a better job of moderating, and Parler isn't or is outright not moderating their content. This may well be true. But the point is now we're arguing a very subjective standard, and the determiners of those standards aren't a judge or jury, but a few CEOs. The standard of "when is it justified to refuse to host an entire platform based upon the nature of how they moderate their worst content" is an incredibly complex question, with no objective answer, and how these company's answer it has a profound effect on freedom of speech, since deplatforming a site like Parler doesn't just censor the speech of those who ought to be censored (by any standard), but everyone else on the platform. It's fairly obvious where this will lead, but I doubt we will correct it before it causes immense harm (not necessarily directly, but due to the blowback that will come from censorship without due process and tit-for-tat escalation.)
fxleach 6y ago
Twitter and Facebook both use their own data centers, with Twitter only recently (mid December 2020) announcing that they will be migrating to use some AWS. They also try to manage their content moderation as best they can and have policies and practices in place to remove content that violates their standards. Parler relies solely on AWS and has 0 content moderation. There are stark differences.

Maken 6y ago

Facebook and Twitter have evident moderation (if maybe insufficient) working on removing or flagging such calls to violence. The argument of this case is not about whether there were user messages calling for execution of public figures, it's about whether Parler did anything about it.

gfodor 6y ago

The argument is Facebook and Twitter are doing a better job of moderating, and Parler isn't or is outright not moderating their content. This may well be true. But the point is now we're arguing a very subjective standard, and the determiners of those standards aren't a judge or jury, but a few CEOs. The standard of "when is it justified to refuse to host an entire platform based upon the nature of how they moderate their worst content" is an incredibly complex question, with no objective answer, and how these company's answer it has a profound effect on freedom of speech, since deplatforming a site like Parler doesn't just censor the speech of those who ought to be censored (by any standard), but everyone else on the platform. It's fairly obvious where this will lead, but I doubt we will correct it before it causes immense harm (not necessarily directly, but due to the blowback that will come from censorship without due process and tit-for-tat escalation.)

fxleach 6y ago

Twitter and Facebook both use their own data centers, with Twitter only recently (mid December 2020) announcing that they will be migrating to use some AWS. They also try to manage their content moderation as best they can and have policies and practices in place to remove content that violates their standards. Parler relies solely on AWS and has 0 content moderation. There are stark differences.