Question: Would this mean that Signal's backend would be prohibited from running on AWS?

After all, it's almost assuredly the case that at least some Signal users are actively plotting violence. Yet end-to-end encryption by definition makes it impossible for Signal to identify that content.

"Almost assuredly" is different than "obvious and blatantly and not being moderated". Obviously. You're making the same argument the government has made against encryption. Moderating a private conversation is obviously different than moderating a public one.

Signal is essentially useless as a platform to recruit people for anything, legal or otherwise.

But then you have cases where people leak private group chats (either from bad opsec or insider jobs) and people face the ban hammer.

A signal conversation is not a public platform. It's the difference between sending a letter and sending a newsletter.

Signal isn't a social media platform it has no need for moderatation.

Signal will be dead soon enough then too.

I think the difference is signal is private, no? Parler people are just airing racist and threatening shit out in the open. I would personally rather it take place in such private online places instead of in front of everyone.

Rhethoric in Germany is already pointing at various WhatsApp and Telegram groups filled with people discussing unsavory topics. Protocols have been published and the groups are not really that private anymore as soon as you no longer know and trust everyone in them. So as soon as the first Signal groups with Nazi policemen shows up, there will be pressure to somehow get rid of those groups...

So what you're saying is you want to have Nazi policemen? I don't understand what your concern is, because they would probably be incapable of performing their duties fairly

No concern, I just wanted to provide an example for what is currently happening in Whatsapp and Telegram (private groups where illegal content got posted, became known and caused the state to try to get rid of those groups and punish members).

I don't understand why people are resorting to apps like signal for privacy, personally. Edit: as in there are better alternatives

Signal is not built with the explicit purpose of providing cover for to forces that publicly undermine democracy.

Signal allows for the encrypted comms that can potentially permit many heinous crimes, but they do not amplify those messages, and it is obvious that by an large is just a useful medium to communicate as usual for most human beings.

"No justice no peace"

Violence has no place in any society for any cause. But I think the spirit of BLM slogan is "No justice no peace. We're not going to remain quiet. We're going to cause some trouble. We're going to create some noise." or as John Lewis said "Good trouble". BLM should change it to "Good trouble", it removes any misconceptions.

Signed, Lorenzo Anderson

that's every social media site of non-trivial size. they're opening pandora's box here. does the footage of killings during the Syrian civil war on youtube qualify? shouldn't photos of hanging homosexuals from cranes get you deplatformed? no? why not?

Most of that stuff eventually got taken down from YouTube. Parler isn't even trying.

> that's every social media site of non-trivial size.

Facebook missed the fact their platform was being used to coordinate a genocide in Myanmar.

They didn’t miss it, they don’t care. AWS doesn’t care about incitement to violence either, which I have never seen on Parler FWIW despite being a heavy user. It’s political grandstanding, and a lame appeal to their woke engineers to keep the dollars flowing in.

Which basically means that neither Facebook, nor Twitter, could be hosted on AWS.

Amazon, Apple, Google and other companies are free to manage their platform by their own rules, in my opinion. I just want the rules to perfectly clear and enforced fairly. So that when Facebook fails to moderate their platform according to Googles rule, their app is kicked out of the Play store as well.

They probably owe a modifier to violence. I mean, plenty of government agencies involved in national security use AWS.

Probably have a different TOS by customer type and governing legal auth. It’d be interesting to boil away the broiler plate and see the differences between them.

Government agencies are, if not precisely incapable of sedition, at least going to have trouble engaging in it.