Parler didn’t even have an events section, it was also fairly difficult to discover content and from what I saw very corporate-like (ie moderated well, mundane posts, etc).

Twitter or Facebook on the other hand, ive seen people call out to riot and burn down cities. Literally, there was a Facebook event to riot in my town (person who planned it was arrested). It led to millions in damages, and I feared for my life.

I was surprised parler got de-platforms because it was the most mundane option TBH.

Apart from the lobbying power of Facebook Twitter size company, it is pretty hard to deplatform them.

On a purely technical level Facebook runs their own infra. They would be hard to deplatform. The only people who are probably capable of doing that is the l3 type service providers. Even there Facebook , google own investments in undersea cables.

Also the size of their deal value to the vendor makes a huge difference. Amazon's revenue impact from parler would not even be a rounding number in their annual report. The impact of loosing fb for many vendors could kill them .

This is true.

Apple can't get rid of Facebook or Google Maps, no matter how much they hate them, but they can easily get rid of pesky startups while claiming to be standing on principles.

Not much of a moral victory there, though! (even if you believe they were right to do so, which I do not.)

Pre-Fortnite-sage I wouldn’t have been so sure, but they had 116m users at that point and were still banned. Obviously that’s still an order of magnitude smaller, but…

Also Fortnite is not utility application it lot easier to ban a game. It is much harder for say Google Maps, while we can discuss the "utility" of the Facebook app, even with facebook main, plenty of people use it as critical communication tool.

Like Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter? Parler was a scapegoat to deflect attention from the rest of this category of software.

Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter all had moderation (whether its effective is another debate).

It's hardly an apples-to-apples co.parison with Parler.

>whether its effective is another debate

Why?

For one thing, they have agreements between whoever provides them service, and if they have not been taken down, it means their business partners feel that they uphold their end of the bargain. Or they run their own infra so they only answer to themselves.

So did Parler. And whether it was effective was another debate as you said. But upon my causal visits to Parler I did not encounter a single call for violence. It seemed like it was as exceedingly rare as anywhere else.

Parler had moderation too. The difference is that Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter's moderation lean left, and Parler's leaned right.

I feel like you may have a right-skewed view of this issue. If you look at it globally it may be different, and I don't know where you're from. Here in the United States (where all four sites are headquartered) sites like Facebook/Twitter are moderated somewhat right leaning for their role in aiding right-leaning former president Donald Trump in 2016. He lost their support later due to his abuse of power but that's a bit out of scope of a HN comment.

Parler was well outside the norm and was given amole opportunity to change.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2021/01/filing-amazon-wa...

Hard to see why it matters if they are elected officials.

Because it was an attack against democracy itself. They weren’t attacking individuals, but the role those individuals hold.

Same reason it matters if they're cops.

Search for you will be more aggressive.

Your prosecution will be more aggressive.

Your punishment will be more harsh.

Suspect there are hosting providers in other countries.

except, Twitter?

You make such great points! How can any be argued? Also. Insurrection and coup are not the same thing. It was an insurrection.

Yea those big tech doing such far left progressive ideals like paying no taxes, dodging all sorts of moral issues, working with another to not poach and lower income. I can’t tell if AOC and Bernie dont run big tech.

It’s only a coup if comes from the coup d'état region of France

How was “it” an insurrection? What is even “it”? Are you talking about the entire group that heard Trump’s speech and marched to the Capitol? Because if so then the vast majority protested peacefully outside the barriers and broke no laws. Are you talking about the ones that trespassed onto the Capitol, because the vast majority broke no laws that leftist groups haven’t in recent years in their own illegal invasions of the Capitol*. Are you talking about those that stole things or vandalized things? Because BLM rioters did that all 2020 and I didn’t hear their acts termed as insurrections. And if not them, who or what exactly are you talking about and how did you prove their intent? Maybe you should consider that a few people acting in such a manner is not evidence that either Parler or Trump are responsible for those individuals’ actions.

* Hell, AOC herself participated in one such illegal riot at the Capitol (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic...). And since it was in the pursuit of a political goal (the Green New Deal) that makes her political criminality an act of terrorism, by definition.

I'm not sure that peaceful sit ins are comparable to calling for the deaths of those working in the building that you're currently ransacking, especially after you've murdered one of the security staff.

A group of people violently breaking into the private and protected areas of a government building, conducting physical assaults on security staff and destroying property, looking for the elected officials that work there while carrying cuffs, calling for their deaths and erecting gallows outside - to me that sounds like insurrection (_a violent uprising against an authority or government._).

Your argument is inconsistent, you judge the capitol rioters as individuals:

> Because if so then the vast majority protested peacefully outside the barriers and broke no laws

But all BLM protesters are rioters?:

> Because BLM rioters did that all 2020 and I didn’t hear their acts termed as insurrections.

You didn't mention anything about how big tech is far left progressive. Yet most of what we've seen is at best ammoral behavior most of the time with some neoliberalism and pure immoral ruthless greed.

I believe you meant to say big tech is neoliberal. If so, I agree. I don't use neoliberal in a positive light. I think it's a net negative. Neoliberals are anything but progressive and in it to truly help society in my opinion. Probably the one common ground we can agree on.

On the one hand, Google deplatformed Parler by blocking their app from the Play Store, and on the other hand it continues to be "cool with" 3rd-party content on Youtube which is "openly calling for violence against and murder of elected officials".

https://youtu.be/jRLH8E_CpP0?t=205

For the record, I'm absolutely fine with Google deciding what content stays and what content goes when it comes to their hosting infrastructure. But in so doing, they need to retain legal culpability for the content that remains.

That is not what "openly calling" means.

Fair enough. But can we at least agree that the line between the 2 examples is so fine that the monologue comedian on a satirical TV program had to run his joke by his lawyer's lawyer in order to make sure he was standing on the right side of it?