Judge refuses to reinstate Parler after Amazon shut it down

Re:Judge refuses to reinstate Parler after Amazon shut it down by gameswithgo on Thursday January 21, 2021 @06:18PM (#25865992)

I downvoted you not because I thought it would intimidate you, but because it lacked any content at all. You just asserted something without explanation. It was a low quality post. The way you respond to the downvotes now also makes me think you are not even arguing in good faith, but just doing performative victimization.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge refuses to reinstate Parler after Amazon shut it down by roenxi on Thursday January 21, 2021 @06:46PM (#25866303)

A legal professional saying a case is interesting, on a forum of mostly technical people, is a contribution. Even if a small one given a lack of supporting argument.

If tptacek, security researcher, says a case is no real case (even with arguments) and an attorney contradicts him then that is evidence tptacek is wrong.

Realistically, I still expect Ptacek to be right - I don't see how Amazon could be forced to host something they don't want to. Nor why it would make sense to make them to. So I hope this lawsuit fails. But the way Parler was assassinated seems a bit questionable and there might be some cause for complaint there. It may be that AWS's terms of service are overruled by some law somewhere and they'll owe someone money.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge refuses to reinstate Parler after Amazon shut it down by jcranmer on Thursday January 21, 2021 @07:22PM (#25866645)

I must disagree here. Someone essentially saying "I have professional authority; you're wrong" is to me worth even less than a bare declaration of "you're wrong"--it is nothing more than an appeal to authority if there is no reasons given for the opinion.

Or, put more simply, to me, reasoning from a non-expert trumps non-reasoning from an expert.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Judge refuses to reinstate Parler after Amazon shut it down by croon on Friday January 22, 2021 @09:32AM (#25871930)

> A legal professional saying a case is interesting, on a forum of mostly technical people, is a contribution. Even if a small one given a lack of supporting argument.

> If tptacek, security researcher, says a case is no real case (even with arguments) and an attorney contradicts him then that is evidence tptacek is wrong.

There is no evidence lest it's explained why the former is wrong. I know for a fact that a judge with actual credentials didn't think the case had merit. Now LiquidmetalFish claims otherwise, without any supporting arguments or reasoning.

[ Parent | on HN ]