3 ms·

I am trying to steer our discussion past the politics of this. It is clear that there exists today violent content on both twitter and FB as well, but that is

I am trying to steer our discussion past the politics of this. It is clear that there exists today violent content on both twitter and FB as well, but that is beside the point. > If Parler implements moderation which will comply with Amazon's terms of service Can you point to where in AWS TOS this is defined? We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle we fall on. If we are able to agree on it, it goes back to my original point of the risk. If you insist that it is objective, then should'nt there be an ombudsman for AWS to ensure that they are now in compliance to it? For something to be objective, there are clear rules that need to be kept on both sides. > a service for allowing users to discuss kidnapping, rape, and murder openly? I implore you to step out of the political lens for this argument. You don't have to search too hard to find such content on twitter and FB as well. The reason they can get away is I guess they can afford to have their own servers. This kind of environment stifles the new entrants and cannot be good. > Can we operate on AWS/ Azure/ Apple's App Store/ etc and meet their terms of service Honestly, I feel that the ground is not stable with these TOS and their changes, and their arbitrary interpretations. -- You brought up Apple... so lets look at how it took the app off its store because Parler promoted violent content; it is an admission that it is watching against it. So, tomorrow, if two guys use its own messaging apps to commit a terrorist attack, should'nt Apple be liable for it? -- Let me ask you for a minute to pretend you are right wing, and you start that recipe making app -- you will not be at peace even though current app is just fine. This unease is what is not good for business confidence.

ogre_codes 6y ago
> Can you point to where in AWS TOS this is defined? It's laid out in the court documents. https://deadline.com/2021/01/amazon-court-filing-parler-for-content-inciting-planning-rape-torture-and-assassination-of-public-officials-private-citizens-1234673134/ https://deadline.com/2021/01/amazon-court-filing-parler-for-... > We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle we fall on. I'm not sure what you are talking about here? We need to agree that Amazon's Terms of Service are subjective? Or are we going to start digging into the rabbit hole of definitions of words like "Harm"? As with any legal discussion, ultimately the courts decide. But the fact that the court didn't see a need to give Parler the injunctive relief they sought says a bunch. > I implore you to step out of the political lens for this argument. I haven't said anything political. I said Parler is in Breech with Amazon. Obviously that's up to a judge to decide, but early signs suggest the judge doesn't favor Parler. If the judge thought Parler was likely to succeed in this case, they'd have given them the injuction they sought. > You don't have to search too hard to find such content on twitter and FB as well. You can certainly find threats and hate speech on Twitter and Facebook, but many many people have been banned and many posts have been blocked for such speech. Parler was created because of the moderating people were facing on Twitter and Facebook. If Twitter and Facebook didn't block this kind of content Parler would not exist. > Let me ask you for a minute to pretend you are right wing, and you start that recipe making app -- you will not be at peace even though current app is just fine. Depends. Is it a recipe app that allows users to make death threats to each other? This is literally what we're talking about here, death threats, rape threats, discussing kidnapping people.
- foolinaround 6y ago
  let me step back 1 more time... forget court cases, Parler - what its doing etc. -- lets focus on tech perspective take a tech CTO, who looks at AWS TOS. Do you find any terms that provide details on the moderation needed? There can be any number of apps and business models -- so when his company gets such a notice, what can be done? there was also the case of a baker who disagreed to serve gay people with their wedding cakes, and amazon TOS also has rules against discrimination. This case went to courts etc but lets say this guy has his site on AWS. In a similar vein, AWS could also dump this guy right? So far, one looked as AWS as infrastructure just like your electric, phone or gas company - going forward, there will be a re-think here. Basically my point is that whatever is not in your control can be taken away from you. And in these days of SaaS and Cloud computing, pretty much most of it is not in your control. This is a huge risk, and new business models will emerge to help mitigate this risk
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    > This is a huge risk, and new business models will emerge to help mitigate this risk There is always a risk when you build your business on a platform then blatantly ignore the contract you sign. Most businesses will mitigate this risk by actually reading and following the terms of contracts they enter into. The business model you are referring to is called having a legal department. Most businesses do.
  - ogre_codes 6y ago
    Apologies for a second reply. > forget court cases, Parler - what its doing etc. So we'll just pretend we can rewind to back prior to the Capitol riot & clown show. Got it. > So far, one looked as AWS as infrastructure just like your electric, phone or gas company - going forward, there will be a re-think here. If we "forget about Parler", why would a tech CTO think any differently this week than they did the prior week? Take away Parler and all of your hypothetical CTO's concerns about Amazon melt away.
    - foolinaround 6y ago
      my friend, how will they melt away? It just was'nt imagined. If we step back to 2018 - No BLM, no capitol riots -- no one would even imagine a AWS pulling the plug. As a startup, it used to be a no-brainer to start on AWS first. The advice given then was not get entired by AWS goodies that locks one to the platform, but one never thought much of using EC2 What i started arguing for was that there will be an interface on top of EC2, that would enable one to provision just as fast on Azure, Google or on bare metal. In this case, one can still get on AWS, and if you have a problem, be able to transition to your own server as fast as you can. this is obviously not in AWS or Google's interest, so needs to be a community driven open source effort, with the entrenched players constantly trying to break their APIs where possible.

ogre_codes 6y ago

> Can you point to where in AWS TOS this is defined? It's laid out in the court documents. https://deadline.com/2021/01/amazon-court-filing-parler-for-content-inciting-planning-rape-torture-and-assassination-of-public-officials-private-citizens-1234673134/ https://deadline.com/2021/01/amazon-court-filing-parler-for-... > We need to agree first that this is a subjective decision on AWS part, regardless of which side of the aisle we fall on. I'm not sure what you are talking about here? We need to agree that Amazon's Terms of Service are subjective? Or are we going to start digging into the rabbit hole of definitions of words like "Harm"? As with any legal discussion, ultimately the courts decide. But the fact that the court didn't see a need to give Parler the injunctive relief they sought says a bunch. > I implore you to step out of the political lens for this argument. I haven't said anything political. I said Parler is in Breech with Amazon. Obviously that's up to a judge to decide, but early signs suggest the judge doesn't favor Parler. If the judge thought Parler was likely to succeed in this case, they'd have given them the injuction they sought. > You don't have to search too hard to find such content on twitter and FB as well. You can certainly find threats and hate speech on Twitter and Facebook, but many many people have been banned and many posts have been blocked for such speech. Parler was created because of the moderating people were facing on Twitter and Facebook. If Twitter and Facebook didn't block this kind of content Parler would not exist. > Let me ask you for a minute to pretend you are right wing, and you start that recipe making app -- you will not be at peace even though current app is just fine. Depends. Is it a recipe app that allows users to make death threats to each other? This is literally what we're talking about here, death threats, rape threats, discussing kidnapping people.

foolinaround 6y ago
let me step back 1 more time... forget court cases, Parler - what its doing etc. -- lets focus on tech perspective take a tech CTO, who looks at AWS TOS. Do you find any terms that provide details on the moderation needed? There can be any number of apps and business models -- so when his company gets such a notice, what can be done? there was also the case of a baker who disagreed to serve gay people with their wedding cakes, and amazon TOS also has rules against discrimination. This case went to courts etc but lets say this guy has his site on AWS. In a similar vein, AWS could also dump this guy right? So far, one looked as AWS as infrastructure just like your electric, phone or gas company - going forward, there will be a re-think here. Basically my point is that whatever is not in your control can be taken away from you. And in these days of SaaS and Cloud computing, pretty much most of it is not in your control. This is a huge risk, and new business models will emerge to help mitigate this risk
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  > This is a huge risk, and new business models will emerge to help mitigate this risk There is always a risk when you build your business on a platform then blatantly ignore the contract you sign. Most businesses will mitigate this risk by actually reading and following the terms of contracts they enter into. The business model you are referring to is called having a legal department. Most businesses do.
- ogre_codes 6y ago
  Apologies for a second reply. > forget court cases, Parler - what its doing etc. So we'll just pretend we can rewind to back prior to the Capitol riot & clown show. Got it. > So far, one looked as AWS as infrastructure just like your electric, phone or gas company - going forward, there will be a re-think here. If we "forget about Parler", why would a tech CTO think any differently this week than they did the prior week? Take away Parler and all of your hypothetical CTO's concerns about Amazon melt away.
  - foolinaround 6y ago
    my friend, how will they melt away? It just was'nt imagined. If we step back to 2018 - No BLM, no capitol riots -- no one would even imagine a AWS pulling the plug. As a startup, it used to be a no-brainer to start on AWS first. The advice given then was not get entired by AWS goodies that locks one to the platform, but one never thought much of using EC2 What i started arguing for was that there will be an interface on top of EC2, that would enable one to provision just as fast on Azure, Google or on bare metal. In this case, one can still get on AWS, and if you have a problem, be able to transition to your own server as fast as you can. this is obviously not in AWS or Google's interest, so needs to be a community driven open source effort, with the entrenched players constantly trying to break their APIs where possible.