DJPocari

I wonder if Apple had some understanding of these advancements in inverting image hashes when they decided to drop their on-device image scanning plans.

My BofA does so I think you just haven't set it up.

The settings pages for BofA are awful so I don't blame you. Took forever to figure out how to setup auto payment for my credit card.

I can imagine a future where certain governments prevent people from purchasing guns without this technology. A company like this could position itself to push society towards that reality while also profiting off of it.

It's not Washington, D.C. it's part of Arlington, VA

During my experience attending Okta events in hope of securing an offer, they accidentally said they would not be able to look over everyone's resume at the end, after assuring us that they totally would earlier on in the webinar. The HR lady forgot to end the webinar and somebody captured it as it went down here: https://streamable.com/c2ytj1

Quite funny on one hand, quite disheartening on the other.

Kudos to you for accepting that it might be stupid. A lot of people say things with complete certainty these days when what they're talking about isn't in their area of expertise.

Straight out of a racing video game.

This is fantastic. I once implemented SHA-256 in Google Sheets to visualize it, but it had horrible performance compared to this. This is the best visualization I've seen yet.

Wow. I'm surprised this is still an issue. My friend was suicidal a few years ago and I couldn't call 911 on the original Google Pixel. Made a scary situation that much worse. Made sure the next phone I bought was an iPhone. You'd think it would be fixed by now.

I was just talking to someone yesterday about how strange it is that Giphy is on Snapchat, even though Facebook now owns it. I thought $400 million was a lot for a GIF platform, but in a world with $28 billion deals like Slack, it doesn't seem too far fetched. The more I think about it, the more it makes sense. It's not just a money making play, but a power play.

Okay, but the problem is that we aren't using the same systems that would be used to take down an ISIS website. Instead we are becoming increasingly reliant on corporate leaders defining where the line is drawn. There is no due process or appeals system; they are the prosecutor and the judge.

Even if it is okay for Facebook and Twitter to impose strict moderation policies, is it okay for AWS, Verizon, or GoDaddy?

I just think it's a slippery slope, and we desperately need to cement our feet in the ground and draw a line somewhere.

Also, when an overwhelming majority of public discourse takes place online (thanks 2020), the people choosing who does and does not get access to the centralized systems have a CRAZY amount of power. Yelling in a public square isn't how ideas spread anymore.

The problem with the whole "free market" argument is that these companies don't abide by the same forces as traditional companies. If all my friends are on Instagram, Twitter, and Snapchat, then I am forced to use those. Social media companies have quasi-monopolies and using alternatives is both difficult and impractical. Perhaps more decentralized communication networks will come about, but the government might use situations like this to shut them down or limit the legality of their use (as people cheer it on).

Sure that's possible, but what if their domain registrar disables their domain name? What if Verizon limits web traffic to and from the website? The idea that that could happen used to be far fetched, but now I wouldn't be surprised.

But this isn't the same as ISIS recruiting off of Twitter where the FBI/CIA/NSA monitors that discourse and contacts the respective platforms. This is a company deciding what should and shouldn't be censored.

There's a difference between protected speech and yelling "FIRE!" in a movie theater. But with the way things are moving, more and more speech is being classified as "hate speech." The line between offensive speech and violent words is getting more murky. I think there needs to be clear standards and clear enforcement.

I agree that Parler should be shut down, but going forward I think we need to rely on court systems with due process (or some new alternative system that specifically addresses digital censorship). I’m afraid of this becoming the norm.

Public discourse increasingly relies on these corporate platforms. I don’t think everyone quite understands the implications of normalizing this behavior, and to me that’s frightening.

Where do we draw the line on how we censor the internet? Obviously actual terrorist group sites can and should be taken down, but this feels like it's getting more murky than that.

- Should we be okay with Facebook censoring these groups?

- Should we be okay with Google censoring search results?

- Should we be okay with Apple censoring apps?

- Should we be okay with AWS censoring websites?

- Should we be okay with GoDaddy censoring domains?

- Should we be okay with Verizon censoring internet traffic?

Giant corporations aren’t simply following court orders, they are acting on their own now. This is problematic for a multitude of reasons. The precedent has been established.

*

EDIT: By "actual terrorist groups" I mean those that are classified as such by the US Government (e.g. FBI, CIA, NSA). While I think QAnon and Proud Boys have many of the characteristics of a terrorist group, they are not classified as such (personally I think they should be, but it's the government's job to decide that).

*