10 ms·

Let’s ask the naive question here. Why would an American company go to Russia to exercise their American right to free speech?

by jl2718 6y ago

netsharc 6y ago
To play devil's advocate, imagine a chat app for Iranians that faces an attack from their government, and asks an EU-based company to host them... Sadly in the alternate reality, people believe tomorrow the "Deep State" will install a regime to take over the country of the "true patriots"...
gurleen_s 6y ago
No government body was restricting their free speech. It was only the free market refusing to do business with them.
- trident5000 6y ago
  "free market" aka 2 coordinating app stores with complete dominance. Server hosting is a step down in oligopoly behavior but its consolidating fast.
  - IOT_Apprentice 6y ago
    Parler does not need a app, they can be a fully functioning site for conservative hate speech by using the latest in web technology. They don't need a app.
  - FireBeyond 6y ago
    Android devices allow side loading, and as noted, you don't need an app to use Parler. Server hosting is still entirely a commodity. "Cloud Providers" are also a (smaller) commodity. Vendor tie-in (to things like AWS) is a problem for a number of businesses entirely less controversial than Parler.
    - trident5000 6y ago
      And I get get into the cake store by going through the dark alley and into the back entrance even though the front door sign says closed. Everyone knows the reach is drastically limited, which is the entire point.
      - FireBeyond 6y ago
        I'm sorry, remind me again what inherent right you have to a third party paying to ensure you have bright lights and big signs on your front door?
    - Mediterraneo10 6y ago
      > Android devices allow side loading Possibly not for long, though. There has been speculation that Google will push to have its "Advanced Protection" model extended to mass-market phones. This would make it impossible to side-load apps, except for that tiny minority of nerds like us who know how to enable ADB and push the app to the device over the command line.
recursive 6y ago
Because no American company wants to touch it with a 10 foot pole. People get confused about the difference between free expression, and compelling companies to support that expression.
- trident5000 6y ago
  Your statement is true. Its also true that the tech market is too consolidated to be considered a free market.
  - BitwiseFool 6y ago
    I'm starting to think the "Free Market" doesn't exist and it's really just a platonic ideal.
    - trident5000 6y ago
      Free markets exist when the DOJ does its job.
      - nextaccountic 6y ago
        Do you mean that the very existence of free markets depends on strict governmental regulation? Without state intervention, free market don't remain free on its own? So, what is free about free markets?
        trident5000 6y ago
        The concept that the govt is a director of the free markets and ensure they remain competitive is older than years you have on this earth.
        joshuamorton 6y ago
        This is how Adam Smith described free markets, potentially influenced by regulation to ensure monopolies and rent seeking didn't exist. In that framing, the market is free from economic privilege, and individual actors are free to compete on equal footing.
birdyrooster 6y ago
Rights are only as good as what your peers are willing to accept. I am sure everyone in the US would agree you have the right to speak your ideas aloud, practice whatever religion you want, and vote for your favorite candidate. Beyond that, which is the first amendment, you are venturing into a gray zone where precedence and common law rule. There is no amendment that says your vendors must continue doing business with you so that you can have the maximum reach for your ideas.
BitwiseFool 6y ago
The consensus seems to be that the right to free speech is only guaranteed by the government and the ideal of free speech doesn't need to be upheld by a corporation. The US government doesn't provide DDoS protection or hosting services so the only other alternative is to find a company outside of the US willing to host you.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
IOT_Apprentice 6y ago
Because they both support sedition against the USA. Anything that furthers turmoil in the US is to Russia's advantage. The Government did not shut down Parler, the free market did. Parler is free to set up their own infrastructure. Perhaps Rebekah Mercer, the big money behind them, can buy a data center to house their servers, she has the money to do so. Or she can purchase a cloud/ISP company to house her other properties like Brietbart.
- acct776 6y ago
  > The Government did not shut down Parler, the free market did. The new inception of the Moral Majority did.
  - IOT_Apprentice 6y ago
    Again, the Government did not. Rebekah Mercer and the Koch family et al are free to acquire a datacenter or cloud hosting company and build out a payments infrastructure as well. Nothing is stopping them from doing so. I'm sure Rupert Murdoch would also be glad to contribute as well. Let capitalism thrive! AWS, Stripe, Paypal, GoFundMe have zero OBLIGATION to provide services to them.
  - IOT_Apprentice 6y ago
    Ah, Morality. https://projects.propublica.org/parler-capitol-videos/ https://projects.propublica.org/parler-capitol-videos/
- tharne 6y ago
  An oligopoly is not an example of the "Free Market". It's the opposite.
- grawprog 6y ago
  >The Government did not shut down Parler, the free market did Amazon's been receiving cia, military and other US government contracts for years now. https://theatlantic.com/article/374632/ https://theatlantic.com/article/374632/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/10/08/75349/meet-americas-newest-military-giant-amazon/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/10/08/75349/meet-ameri... https://aws.amazon.com/contract-center/#federal https://aws.amazon.com/contract-center/#federal Amazon took a website off their services critical of the government and incoming administration. If amazon did this to a company critical of one of their private contract companies, this would be anti-trust behaviour.
kordlessagain 6y ago
Because the CEO is married to a Russian?
rasz 6y ago
Because it was founded by a techbro dude who just happened to fall in love with random Russian girl visiting Vegas cough Butina cough, and proceeded to move to Russia where they got married?
mansion7 6y ago
The same reason Snowden had to go there.

Let’s ask the naive question here. Why would an American company go to Russia to exercise their American right to free speech?

by jl2718 6y ago

Let’s ask the naive question here. Why would an American company go to Russia to exercise their American right to free speech?

netsharc 6y ago

To play devil's advocate, imagine a chat app for Iranians that faces an attack from their government, and asks an EU-based company to host them... Sadly in the alternate reality, people believe tomorrow the "Deep State" will install a regime to take over the country of the "true patriots"...

gurleen_s 6y ago

No government body was restricting their free speech. It was only the free market refusing to do business with them.

trident5000 6y ago
"free market" aka 2 coordinating app stores with complete dominance. Server hosting is a step down in oligopoly behavior but its consolidating fast.
- IOT_Apprentice 6y ago
  Parler does not need a app, they can be a fully functioning site for conservative hate speech by using the latest in web technology. They don't need a app.
- FireBeyond 6y ago
  Android devices allow side loading, and as noted, you don't need an app to use Parler. Server hosting is still entirely a commodity. "Cloud Providers" are also a (smaller) commodity. Vendor tie-in (to things like AWS) is a problem for a number of businesses entirely less controversial than Parler.
  - trident5000 6y ago
    And I get get into the cake store by going through the dark alley and into the back entrance even though the front door sign says closed. Everyone knows the reach is drastically limited, which is the entire point.
    - FireBeyond 6y ago
      I'm sorry, remind me again what inherent right you have to a third party paying to ensure you have bright lights and big signs on your front door?
  - Mediterraneo10 6y ago
    > Android devices allow side loading Possibly not for long, though. There has been speculation that Google will push to have its "Advanced Protection" model extended to mass-market phones. This would make it impossible to side-load apps, except for that tiny minority of nerds like us who know how to enable ADB and push the app to the device over the command line.

recursive 6y ago

Because no American company wants to touch it with a 10 foot pole. People get confused about the difference between free expression, and compelling companies to support that expression.

trident5000 6y ago
Your statement is true. Its also true that the tech market is too consolidated to be considered a free market.
- BitwiseFool 6y ago
  I'm starting to think the "Free Market" doesn't exist and it's really just a platonic ideal.
  - trident5000 6y ago
    Free markets exist when the DOJ does its job.
    - nextaccountic 6y ago
      Do you mean that the very existence of free markets depends on strict governmental regulation? Without state intervention, free market don't remain free on its own? So, what is free about free markets?
      - trident5000 6y ago
        The concept that the govt is a director of the free markets and ensure they remain competitive is older than years you have on this earth.
      - joshuamorton 6y ago
        This is how Adam Smith described free markets, potentially influenced by regulation to ensure monopolies and rent seeking didn't exist. In that framing, the market is free from economic privilege, and individual actors are free to compete on equal footing.

birdyrooster 6y ago

Rights are only as good as what your peers are willing to accept. I am sure everyone in the US would agree you have the right to speak your ideas aloud, practice whatever religion you want, and vote for your favorite candidate. Beyond that, which is the first amendment, you are venturing into a gray zone where precedence and common law rule. There is no amendment that says your vendors must continue doing business with you so that you can have the maximum reach for your ideas.

BitwiseFool 6y ago

The consensus seems to be that the right to free speech is only guaranteed by the government and the ideal of free speech doesn't need to be upheld by a corporation. The US government doesn't provide DDoS protection or hosting services so the only other alternative is to find a company outside of the US willing to host you.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

IOT_Apprentice 6y ago

Because they both support sedition against the USA. Anything that furthers turmoil in the US is to Russia's advantage. The Government did not shut down Parler, the free market did. Parler is free to set up their own infrastructure. Perhaps Rebekah Mercer, the big money behind them, can buy a data center to house their servers, she has the money to do so. Or she can purchase a cloud/ISP company to house her other properties like Brietbart.

acct776 6y ago
> The Government did not shut down Parler, the free market did. The new inception of the Moral Majority did.
- IOT_Apprentice 6y ago
  Again, the Government did not. Rebekah Mercer and the Koch family et al are free to acquire a datacenter or cloud hosting company and build out a payments infrastructure as well. Nothing is stopping them from doing so. I'm sure Rupert Murdoch would also be glad to contribute as well. Let capitalism thrive! AWS, Stripe, Paypal, GoFundMe have zero OBLIGATION to provide services to them.
- IOT_Apprentice 6y ago
  Ah, Morality. https://projects.propublica.org/parler-capitol-videos/ https://projects.propublica.org/parler-capitol-videos/
tharne 6y ago
An oligopoly is not an example of the "Free Market". It's the opposite.
grawprog 6y ago
>The Government did not shut down Parler, the free market did Amazon's been receiving cia, military and other US government contracts for years now. https://theatlantic.com/article/374632/ https://theatlantic.com/article/374632/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/10/08/75349/meet-americas-newest-military-giant-amazon/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/10/08/75349/meet-ameri... https://aws.amazon.com/contract-center/#federal https://aws.amazon.com/contract-center/#federal Amazon took a website off their services critical of the government and incoming administration. If amazon did this to a company critical of one of their private contract companies, this would be anti-trust behaviour.

kordlessagain 6y ago

Because the CEO is married to a Russian?

rasz 6y ago

Because it was founded by a techbro dude who just happened to fall in love with random Russian girl visiting Vegas cough Butina cough, and proceeded to move to Russia where they got married?

mansion7 6y ago

The same reason Snowden had to go there.