3 ms·

> But if you wrote that on a site hosted on AWS, there is nothing in principle from Amazon taking the platform down. Politician Y calls his buddy Jeff Bezos, an

by Jochim 6y ago

> But if you wrote that on a site hosted on AWS, there is nothing in principle from Amazon taking the platform down. Politician Y calls his buddy Jeff Bezos, and fwoomp! Gone. This should be concerning. Why should it be concerning at all? There are a few thousand other hosting providers they can go to. The slightly stronger argument seems to be that the people making these death threats on Parler should not have been banned from Twitter/FB in the first place. FB/Twitter have far less competition and most of their value is in the network effects they've established. The tech giants should absolutely be broken up/more heavily regulated, but I think there are much better examples of why than Parler.

mschuster91 6y ago
> The slightly stronger argument seems to be that the people making these death threats on Parler should not have been banned from Twitter/FB in the first place. That's not a strong argument at all. Spouting death threats gets you arrested if you do it in public (and someone records it or calls the cops), so it should also lead to a time-limited or permanent ban from social networks. Social networks are not a free-for-all zone.
- Jochim 6y ago
  > That's not a strong argument at all. I don't think it's a strong argument either, I just think it's slightly stronger than the one people are trying to use for why AWS should be forced to host Parler. > Spouting death threats gets you arrested if you do it in public (and someone records it or calls the cops), so it should also lead to a time-limited or permanent ban from social networks. The argument from people coming out against the moderation of these threats seems to be that FB/Twitter etc. should only remove this content after receiving some sort of court order/government mandate to do so, that they shouldn't "play cop" as it were. Personally this seems like a pretty stupid take. > Social networks are not a free-for-all zone. Some people are arguing that the should be, that they should be treated as the equivalent of a modern town square. I don't necessarily agree with this take, but I can see why people might think that way.
  - mschuster91 6y ago
    > Some people are arguing that the should be, that they should be treated as the equivalent of a modern town square A modern town square isn't a free-for-all zone either. Try to go and shout "fuck <n-word>" or raise the arm to the Nazi salute in an area where people of color live and you'll be lucky to escape with a minor beating. Town squares are a form of societal self-preservation too - unruly elements get dealt with, either by the people themselves or by the police.

by Jochim 6y ago

mschuster91 6y ago

> The slightly stronger argument seems to be that the people making these death threats on Parler should not have been banned from Twitter/FB in the first place. That's not a strong argument at all. Spouting death threats gets you arrested if you do it in public (and someone records it or calls the cops), so it should also lead to a time-limited or permanent ban from social networks. Social networks are not a free-for-all zone.

Jochim 6y ago
> That's not a strong argument at all. I don't think it's a strong argument either, I just think it's slightly stronger than the one people are trying to use for why AWS should be forced to host Parler. > Spouting death threats gets you arrested if you do it in public (and someone records it or calls the cops), so it should also lead to a time-limited or permanent ban from social networks. The argument from people coming out against the moderation of these threats seems to be that FB/Twitter etc. should only remove this content after receiving some sort of court order/government mandate to do so, that they shouldn't "play cop" as it were. Personally this seems like a pretty stupid take. > Social networks are not a free-for-all zone. Some people are arguing that the should be, that they should be treated as the equivalent of a modern town square. I don't necessarily agree with this take, but I can see why people might think that way.
- mschuster91 6y ago
  > Some people are arguing that the should be, that they should be treated as the equivalent of a modern town square A modern town square isn't a free-for-all zone either. Try to go and shout "fuck <n-word>" or raise the arm to the Nazi salute in an area where people of color live and you'll be lucky to escape with a minor beating. Town squares are a form of societal self-preservation too - unruly elements get dealt with, either by the people themselves or by the police.