Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by amanaplanacanal on Monday January 18, 2021 @05:38PM
(#25827555)
Honestly I think the legal status quo is pretty close to ideal: governments may not limit speech, but platforms can clamp down on anything they want. The only problem with the platforms is that they still somewhat cling to the idea that they won’t censor speech, which is frankly ridiculous. Of course they will censor, they should just admit it and clamp down any speech they find abhorrent. Allow the marketplace (and marketplace of ideas) to work.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by pbourke on Monday January 18, 2021 @05:53PM
(#25827700)
The status quo has brought us to today. The platforms only act when they see that the political winds have shifted. There were precisely zero “profiles in courage” among the platforms until after the election. We can expect nothing more - they’re businesses beholden to investors and regulators above all else.
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by trident5000 on Monday January 18, 2021 @06:39PM
(#25828093)
I'm surprised at the lack of recognition that Google and Apple banned Parler as soon as the dems gained all 3 branches of power. It could not be more clear what the motive was. Extremism and violence are on Twitter and Facebook all day long. They're still in the app stores.
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by sergiomattei on Monday January 18, 2021 @07:29PM
(#25828494)
Could it be because, I don't know, extremists seized the Capitol that same day?
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by sojournerc on Monday January 18, 2021 @05:52PM
(#25827691)
What about DNS? ISP?
There must be some line. Sure you can build your own server and connect it to the internet, but if you're handing out cards with an IP address, marketability is limited.
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by pixl97 on Monday January 18, 2021 @06:19PM
(#25827946)
IP address connectivity should be a universal right. DNS is trickier, but the root level companies that provide names should be required to host your NS records (not your DNS servers themselves).
After that I don't believe the internet owes you anything.
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by ncallaway on Monday January 18, 2021 @06:57PM
(#25828240)
That's where I come out too.
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by ukd1 on Monday January 18, 2021 @06:45PM
(#25828151)
1.1.1.1 disagrees with you, but that's an aside.
ISPs get common-carrier status - I think platforms should be able to have this protection and requirements too, if they want it. For ISPs this protects them from things folks do with their service, meaning they don't have to completely monitor your use.
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by sojournerc on Monday January 18, 2021 @08:51PM
(#25829049)
> they don't have to completely monitor your use.
Where is this coming from? I don't need any monitoring... not ISP, not government...
What happened to life and liberty?
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by ukd1 on Monday January 25, 2021 @10:27PM
(#25912139)
I'm with you; pretty sure tHinK-oF-tEh-chIldRen and general fear based culture is what happened.
Re:Parler’s de-platforming shows the exceptional power of cl...
by thayne on Monday January 18, 2021 @07:00PM
(#25828260)
The problem is the amount of power held by just a few "platforms." The government may not legally be able to censor what they don't like, but if they can influence the platforms that can it amounts to the same thing.