3 ms·

> We can make similar arguments Hey remember when Apple, Google & Amazon all colluded to ban Parler off the face of the planet within days, a purely political

> We can make similar arguments Hey remember when Apple, Google & Amazon all colluded to ban Parler off the face of the planet within days, a purely political move, based on some shaky allegations of moderation? Meanwhile TikTok is labelled as a "must have" app in the AppStore....

whoknowsidont 3y ago
>Hey remember when Apple, Google & Amazon all colluded to ban Parler off the face of the planet within days, a purely political move, I actually don't remember that. I do remember lots of terroristic and genocidal posts on Parler though.
- suoduandao3 3y ago
  It's easy to botspam a competitor with terroristic and genocidal posts if you only need a fig leaf to remove the platform - not a great precedent to align with. Also, didn't a spokesperson for Harvard recently say some calls for genocide were acceptable on their platform (campus) depending on context? Why aren't the anti-1st amendment types trying to ban Harvard? Edit: Not a rhetorical question for the downvoters.
  - whoknowsidont 3y ago
    Your comment seems to have spiraled out into... I don't even know where? Were you combining threads in your head? >It's easy to botspam a competitor with terroristic and genocidal posts I don't think it's necessary to employ conspiracy theory accessories when the stated moderation policy of the platform was "no moderation."
    - suoduandao3 3y ago
      Not combining threads, but it was a rather obscure reference. The president of Harvard recently testified before congress that calls for genocide may not violate Harvard's code of conduct 'depending on context'. Which makes a widespread effort to censor Parler for hosting calls for genocide rather hypocritical IMHO. Hope that's clearer.
      - whoknowsidont 3y ago
        No not really.
        suoduandao3 3y ago
        OK, last try for clarity: If you think it's just to debank Parler for hosting genocidal speech and also think it's just NOT to debank Harvard for hosting genocidal speech, I think you're a hypocrite. And if that's not your position I'd be interested to hear how I've misinterpreted it.
Spivak 3y ago
> Parler off the face of the planet, a purely political move Having a policy against hosting apps that host illegal content and taking no measures to remove it is a political move? There are plenty of active conservative communities on the internet, Parler just went the "free as in anarchy" speech route. Tumblr faced a ban on iOS for pornographic content and Reddit also has to sanitize their default experience to be on app stores, so it's not just Parler. It's why BlueSky is interesting because they have moderation which will get them on app stores, but you can turn it off.
- wannacboatmovie 3y ago
  Many mass shootings in recent memory were live streamed on Facebook and Instagram. Removing those posts after the fact is a useless gesture. The evil already happened. Meta was never punished. Selective enforcement of TOS is political and utter nonsense. If TikTok were guilty of what they are accused of (being a foreign intelligence and propaganda tool), why is Congressional action necessary? Why wouldn't have private industry already quashed it as they did other apps? Those accusations seem a bit more serious than "mean posts with naughty words".
  - Spivak 3y ago
    > Removing those posts after the fact is a useless gesture. The evil already happened. Meta was never punished. I mean this sincerely and in good faith, what else can you do? We don't have the PreCrime division. The accusation isn't that Twitter/Facebook don't ever host illegal or objectionable content but that they have a procedure for addressing and removing it. Parler just said no, we don't have and will never have such a policy. If Tumblr say, despite having a moderation policy just stopped enforcing it they would find themselves staring down the banhammer again. As to your second point the answer is in your own question, I don't think they actually buy that TikTok is either of those things. Hell, the NFL partnered with TikTok and they're basically cheerleaders for the US military.
    - wannacboatmovie 3y ago
      For that matter, the most perplexing one for me is President Biden is creating and posting campaign videos on TikTok (not in an official capacity as POTUS but as a candidate). If one truly felt the content of this bill was true, as he has endorsed signing it, why would he even use the app in the first place? Are Zoomer voters that inaccessible otherwise?

whoknowsidont 3y ago

>Hey remember when Apple, Google & Amazon all colluded to ban Parler off the face of the planet within days, a purely political move, I actually don't remember that. I do remember lots of terroristic and genocidal posts on Parler though.

suoduandao3 3y ago
It's easy to botspam a competitor with terroristic and genocidal posts if you only need a fig leaf to remove the platform - not a great precedent to align with. Also, didn't a spokesperson for Harvard recently say some calls for genocide were acceptable on their platform (campus) depending on context? Why aren't the anti-1st amendment types trying to ban Harvard? Edit: Not a rhetorical question for the downvoters.
- whoknowsidont 3y ago
  Your comment seems to have spiraled out into... I don't even know where? Were you combining threads in your head? >It's easy to botspam a competitor with terroristic and genocidal posts I don't think it's necessary to employ conspiracy theory accessories when the stated moderation policy of the platform was "no moderation."
  - suoduandao3 3y ago
    Not combining threads, but it was a rather obscure reference. The president of Harvard recently testified before congress that calls for genocide may not violate Harvard's code of conduct 'depending on context'. Which makes a widespread effort to censor Parler for hosting calls for genocide rather hypocritical IMHO. Hope that's clearer.
    - whoknowsidont 3y ago
      No not really.
      - suoduandao3 3y ago
        OK, last try for clarity: If you think it's just to debank Parler for hosting genocidal speech and also think it's just NOT to debank Harvard for hosting genocidal speech, I think you're a hypocrite. And if that's not your position I'd be interested to hear how I've misinterpreted it.

Spivak 3y ago

> Parler off the face of the planet, a purely political move Having a policy against hosting apps that host illegal content and taking no measures to remove it is a political move? There are plenty of active conservative communities on the internet, Parler just went the "free as in anarchy" speech route. Tumblr faced a ban on iOS for pornographic content and Reddit also has to sanitize their default experience to be on app stores, so it's not just Parler. It's why BlueSky is interesting because they have moderation which will get them on app stores, but you can turn it off.

wannacboatmovie 3y ago
Many mass shootings in recent memory were live streamed on Facebook and Instagram. Removing those posts after the fact is a useless gesture. The evil already happened. Meta was never punished. Selective enforcement of TOS is political and utter nonsense. If TikTok were guilty of what they are accused of (being a foreign intelligence and propaganda tool), why is Congressional action necessary? Why wouldn't have private industry already quashed it as they did other apps? Those accusations seem a bit more serious than "mean posts with naughty words".
- Spivak 3y ago
  > Removing those posts after the fact is a useless gesture. The evil already happened. Meta was never punished. I mean this sincerely and in good faith, what else can you do? We don't have the PreCrime division. The accusation isn't that Twitter/Facebook don't ever host illegal or objectionable content but that they have a procedure for addressing and removing it. Parler just said no, we don't have and will never have such a policy. If Tumblr say, despite having a moderation policy just stopped enforcing it they would find themselves staring down the banhammer again. As to your second point the answer is in your own question, I don't think they actually buy that TikTok is either of those things. Hell, the NFL partnered with TikTok and they're basically cheerleaders for the US military.
  - wannacboatmovie 3y ago
    For that matter, the most perplexing one for me is President Biden is creating and posting campaign videos on TikTok (not in an official capacity as POTUS but as a candidate). If one truly felt the content of this bill was true, as he has endorsed signing it, why would he even use the app in the first place? Are Zoomer voters that inaccessible otherwise?