Re:Amazon S3 Object Lambda
by skynet-9000 on Saturday March 20, 2021 @12:46PM
(#26524309)
> If you’re not flaunting ToS,... you should be fine.
https://aws.amazon.com/aup/: You may not use, or encourage, promote, facilitate or instruct others to use, the Services.. for any.. offensive use, or to transmit, store, display, distribute or otherwise make available content that is.. offensive.
What does offensive mean? Who defines it?
Re:Amazon S3 Object Lambda
by skynet-9000 on Saturday March 20, 2021 @12:47PM
(#26524314)
> Twitter systematically allows illegal behavior like parler did.
Does this sound libelous to you, and do you have evidence supporting this? Even AWS's response didn't allege Parler "systematically allowed illegal behavior".
Re:Amazon S3 Object Lambda
by ChicagoDave on Saturday March 20, 2021 @07:45PM
(#26526942)
You forgot the "I don't think" part of that sentence.
If you’re building something that a cloud provider might adopt or build their own, well, isn’t that risky regardless of the cloud provider element?
I know some companies avoid one provider or the other out of competitive concerns. That seems easily managed with contractual obligations.
Twitter has enabled some borderline illegal behavior, but the account holder has been the one at risk. I don’t think Twitter systematically allows illegal behavior like parler did.