Hacker News Reader

Comment by unityByFreedom | Hacker News Reader

I'm fine with banning apps that permit organizing violent insurrection in response to independently certified elections.

That isn't the case here however and I expect some resolution will come.

View on HN

Why didn't the primary app involved banned then?

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/14/opinion/facebook-far-righ...

Not sure Facebook was primary but.. Did people really post about storming the capitol using their real names?

Of course they did - after all, they wouldn't do it if they thought they were in the wrong. In fairness, the vast majority of those who went to the capitol that day were there for the Trump rally, not smashing up congress.

Parler's stated goal was to allow that type of speech while Facebook at least put a cursory amount of effort in blocking it.

Hmm, so as long as the firehose of vomit continues to spew from the PR dept, it's all good? All you have to do is make it look like you're doing something?

Never used parler and not defending them but idk why facebook gets a free pass from you, they are far more to blame for the events that transpired IMO.

Facebook doesn't get a free pass from me, I'm just pointing out that Facebook made at least an attempt, publicly, to combat insurrectionists / hate speech while Parler advertised as a safe space for the same.

These are just the facts, interpret them as you wish.

IMO:

Facebook (and YouTube, and Twitter) could and should do a lot more. The more they do the more likely it is they will be legislated out of existence and I'm not sure how they strike a good balance there. I also think Facebook in particular could do better but doesn't want to in order to keep engagement up - yet they want the good PR they can get for banning hate speech. They're trying to have it both ways and are awful. That's still different than Parler where the entire reason it exists is to push radical viewpoints without governance.

Very good, let's petition to ban signal. In fact, let's ban encryption altogether as such a technology can be used to coordinate terrorist attacks.

No, that's government level. I'm only fine with private entities choosing to do or not do business with whom they please. If google wants to block apps that use encryption then they can do it. Of course that would destroy their business so they won't.

How do you draw the line exactly? What if someone used FB or the official Appole/Google email/chat apps to start a revolution in some country? For illegal stuff you have laws and examples, for this stuff you need to guess what Silicon Valley does not like and censor your content just in case.

For the case you mention, do you think it helped? As I said I am not from US so I have no idea if the were any effects.

It's not me who draws the line and that's the point. Government/the public isn't involved. The companies themselves draw the line.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com