For a few thousand dollars a month I operate my own servers in n>1 physical locations with different companies and different transit providers.

I figured it out. Pirate Bay figured it out. Any company that genuinely cares about eliminating SPOFs has figured it out.

Perhaps Parler did not realize that being aligned with conservatism was grounds for deplatforming. I am sure they will learn as will the whole world.

Let's hope so! The more we diversify our social media consumption as a society the better off we all are. Well, other than Jack and Mark.

Honestly, I think they'd be happier too. They'd have less money and power, sure, but they'd also get less death threats, and a lot of the world (including world leaders) would hate them a little less.

I don't think they would care if Facebook and Twitter were each 1/10 the size of what they are today -- they'd still be billionaires and the companies would still be mind-boggling huge. They only care that the companies are much larger than competitors.

I didn't read Dorsey's actual tweets, but here's what the Guardian said about them:

>Dorsey underscored in his tweets a need for a new “open decentralized standard for social media”.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/jan/13/trump-twi...

He's been talking about this for a while.

> Twitter is funding a small independent team of up to five open source architects, engineers, and designers to develop an open and decentralized standard for social media. The goal is for Twitter to ultimately be a client of this standard.

https://twitter.com/jack/status/1204766078468911106

I was not aware that "Remember the photographs from inside your home while you slept? Yes, that close. You will die a sudden death!", "We are going to fight a civil was on the 20th", "we need to start systematically assassinating #liberal leaders", or "shoot the police that protect these shitbag senators" were conservative political opinions.

I'm not sure I like the world where conservatives are making bed-fellows with pedophiles and ISIS.

Over this last week, I've talked to people who have un-ironically argued that companies should not be allowed to moderate content... even if that content is illegal!

It's like a whole section of the population is just learning for the first time that the internet is real life and it's not the wild-west it was in the 90s.

"A platform for the deplatformed" was basically their only marketing pitch. They (should of) knew.

Fortunately being aligned with conservatism isn't grounds for deplatforming, as can be seen by the literal millions of conservatives on twitter who haven't been deplatformed. It's easy: you have a discussion about your political beliefs without telling the other person you're going to murder them for disagreeing with you.

Seriously. I laugh whenever someone cries about widespread censorship of the right. The most lucrative media career right now is to be an outspoken conservative. There are probably thousands of such pundits/journalists/analysts/bloggers/podcast hosts/commentators on pretty much every medium, and they all seem to be talking non-stop.

Similar to how every mainstream comedian is persecuted and telling "unfiltered" jokes that they supposedly aren't allowed to anymore, and they'll totally get into trouble for it later.

Can we please move on from the assertion and justification of the very real censorship push on the grounds that "they all deserved it" by claiming that all the people deplatformed were "telling the other person you're going to murder them for disagreeing with you"?

This is an intellectually dishonest take at best. I won't speculate on the other end of the spectrum.

I for one am disgusted at how servile about censorship readers of HN have been lately just because it was their percieved enemy who was being attacked, without understanding that this will be applied to $notenemy later. I've frequently complained about the state of "too many MBAs and not enough hackers" here but fuck the last few months really brought that out. Starting to wish I knew if there is a hn where the more anti-authoritarian types hung out.

The commenter claimed being conservative and no other attribute/thing was a sufficient condition to be deplatformed. That is an absurdly large claim and requires absurdly large evidence. You can go on twitter right now and find conservative opinions, including the opinions of those from Fox news, the most watched news channel in America.

“Fortunately criticizing Putin isn't grounds for being assassinated, as can be seen by the literal millions of people in Russia who haven't been murdered yet. It's easy: be nobody and have a discussion about your political beliefs in the kitchen with only close relatives.”

All well known recent deplatforming cases were done on a flimsy grounds for off-platform activities. They are very hard to defend.

Again, plenty of other unpopular websites have figured it out.

Parler just didn’t care.

https://prq.se/?p=colo Famous for starting the pirate bay, they're still in action and pretty much specifically provide freedom of speech hosting. I think it plays in the game the Parler investors wanted to play that they got shutdown and can't get back online. Fuels the "we've been censored" angle.

there's plenty of big colocation and hosting companies in Russia.

Which will not provide you service unless you give them Russian phone number and scan of your Russian passport.

Parler was backed by very deep pockets with existing international connections. They could afford to purchase the necessary Russian friends to make this happen.

The CEO is married to a Russian so that isn't a problem.

Sites like stormfront manage to stay up, despite being way older and arguably more extreme.

If there's ever a "capitol riot" sized event linked back to those sites, their BCPs will be put to the test as well.

plenty of far right European terrorist attacks have been linked directly to stormfront, including the attack by Anders Breivik.