skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Hey Glenn you want to tell us how international investigations into chemical weapons use in Syria is an egregious projection of western imperialism onto poor Assad and his band of Kremlin armed Iranian militias?

That was was a hoot. Until the chemical attacks continued and you had to purge your Twitter timeline to save face since you couldn't maintain coherent counter-narrative that kept Putin and Assad pure. That was kind of a dark move, for a supposed liberal journalist.

This guy is burned.
The police murders were committed under the BLM protests.

Consequently, the media mislabeling of the reign of terror campaign this summer doesn’t legitimize destroying communities because a few people were pissed off and corporations attempted to add an air of legitimacy to it.

I watched a bunch of people chant at a door on Wednesday, a couple windows were broken, a guy in viking shit flexed on a chair, an unarmed woman was shot climbing through a window, and my feed is filled with hyperbolic morons screaming sedition and traitors.

I’m over it.
Granted, but how long until its used as precedent to put you on a list?
Didn’t the Southern States do exactly this? And formed the Confederate States of America. Where did that end up?
Did Parler have 74 million users planning murder? No, this isn't delegitimizing conservatives. It's delegitimizing people who are insane, and in this case many of these insane people happen to be conservative.
We can't live in a world where people are allowed to openly plot the death of other people.
> You have never had the right of free speech on someone else’s property.

Wrong. You always do. They simply have free speech too.
I think we can all agree that a key tenancy of fascism is suppression of dissent, often violently. These companies effectively are the public square.
>By this logic why was @blcklivesmatter not kicked off Twitter etc long ago?

Do you mean why wasn't twitter kicked off AWS for users making calls for violence? If so: because Twitter has a moderation strategy in place that clearly isn't perfect but has proven to AWS that they're taking it seriously.

If you actually meant why wasn't @blcklivesmatter kicked off twitter I guess I'm not sure what relevance that has to Parler being kicked off AWS. But my first guess would be: because they deleted the offending tweets and stopped making repeated posts calling for violence?

I don't use twitter, do you have some examples of recent @blcklivesmatter tweets that are actively calling for violence against elected officials that haven't been moderated or removed?
China is the one that keeps barking and talking about taking over Taiwan.
In fairness, there are other issues framed this way. The "overreaction" to COVID-19 is seen as suppressing economic rights and livelihoods.
So your position is that you can walk into any private business that offers free cookies (eg. A car dealership or bank) and then hold a rally to incite violence in that establishment and you believe they’d have to go to court to have you removed from their private property?

Your twitter account is not a product. The product is sold to advertisers. And even the ads they will or won’t show has guidelines they are not legally forced to show ads that would incite violence.

The legal argument being made in multiple threads about freedom of speech like this demonstrates that you all know literally nothing about freedom of speech or what it means
Yes, you’re very right. This is a censorship in action, due to current politics.

Twitter, Facebook, Big Tech at large, are proud to stand up for free speech against governments abroad (Arab Spring), but here in the US, free speech against government results in deplatforming.
This feels like an insane precedent to be setting.

Any platform that accepts user generated content can potentially end up in this situation. Amazon appears to be setting a precedent here that any platform that has not fully solved content moderation at scale risks being kicked of AWS.

It opens the door to what is effectively a DDoS; outpace moderation capability, get the site kicked off Amazon.
It's a big world. Someone will host them.
This is in fact how a “marketplace of ideas” is supposed to work. Marketplace does not mean everyone gets a protected place to play forever and ever. Marketplace means winners and losers. A marketplace of ideas means some ideas win and some lose.
That's a good job for an FBI task force.
People get hung up on whether a group is an officially recognized terrorist organization or not, as if a group needs to be labeled terrorists by a three letter government agency before they can terrorize people, throw bricks through windows, burn down churches, ransack capitols, kidnap governors, lynch people, etc. It's a meaningless distinction whether or not they are officially recognized as a terrorists by the government.
So? We could start a "government information bureau" to fix that, if we wanted.
So what is Snapchat and other messaging platforms hosted on that allow of the sharing of underage nudity
It has to be. EFF is pro free-speech and pro privacy (fights censorship tools and government back doors to encryption, etc). Huge powerful corporations coordinating to censor someone is antithetical to their mission.

However, they can’t take the pro free speech stance here because most of their donors are generally leftists who absolutely despise Trump. So the only move is to put the mission on the back burner and kowtow to the zeitgeist.
Absolutely but the platform isn't doing the amplification, people do. This is the same thing as someone copying your chant on a street in front of a courthouse. The street isn't doing the amplifying, the people are.
There's video evidence, lol: https://twitter.com/59dallas/status/1346963199778828290?s=20
Parler is being used to plan murder. See the link below. Posts arent being taken down on Parler. This has nothing to do with Amazon not liking a product. People are planning actual murder. Are you serious ?
https://twitter.com/IntelDoge/status/1348099918381068289
I think that's a reasonable argument - it's just very different from the idea that someone literally cannot communicate their message if they're not allowed to do it on Twitter.
I believe the request was made due to the protestors causing problems on the flights:

On an American Airlines flight from Dallas, a large contingent of Trump supporters got in an angry yelling match with other passengers after one of the president’s supporters projected “Trump 2020” on the cabin ceiling and walls.
I suspect they could even have the hate speech against protected classes. Voat survived. 4chan survives. Numerous hateful websites survive. The KKK has websites. Parler was no better a week ago.

These sites all get eliminated when they are tied to a violent attack.
And yet somehow have never resorted to saying who can and cannot use their service based on their political beliefs.

Keep trying.
Present few evidence - not widespread enough, "okay there were a few irregularities"

Present a large number of evidence - Gish Gallop

unsourced claims - Links and sources speak for themselves, it is not as if I have manufacured them out of thin air.

> burden of proof is on the accuser and you aren't even close to that standard

If me presenting over a thousand links with lets say 90% weak evidence doesnt come close to a standard I dont know what will.

> It's also worth noting that Trump and his associates brought a lot of the so called "evidence" to court and were nearly laughed out of court almost every single time.

You are right about this one. Though as far as I know, were not dismissed on the matter of the evidence itslef but on precedent, issues regarding the timing and other matters.
My app made $1300 in the first month and I failed to grow it
The cohesive argument I've seen these platforms make isn't that this speech shouldn't be regulated, but that there should be legal rather than cherry-picked consequences for the instigators. Meaning: if someone is making death threats, go ahead and arrest them and try them in court under whatever laws they have violated.

If they have not violated any laws, then that speech is legal and should be allowed to stay up. Right now there is a weird middle ground where nobody is directly prosecuted but they do face consequences in the form of de-platforming. But if someone is so dangerous that they do not deserve a platform, then the right answer is obviously not to take away their Twitter privileges, but to place them in jail where they cannot continue to cause more harm. If they are not deemed harmful enough to jail, then de-platforming them is (they argue) unfair.
True, so more like another branch of power
Zionism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembl...

You're welcome.

I'm pretty okay with the Abe Lincoln angle, but the yoga article is ridiculously fringe thinking that nobody could possibly take seriously.
Which was indeed said by opponents of civil rights at the time. And people were arrested on that basis:

> December 13th 1954: White civil rights activist Carl Braden was convicted of sedition in Louisville, Kentucky on this day. His crime? He and his wife Anne purchased a home in an all-white neighborhood and then almost immediately sold it to an African-American.

http://todayinclh.com/?event=civil-rights-activist-carl-brad...
There are degrees of radicalism. BLM founders already described themselves as "trained Marxists". That's sufficient for anyone paying attention to be concerned.
Nearly all the people there were just walking around outside.
Maybe just no hate speech in general? I'm not totally clear what a protected class means in this context. Like what would hate speech towards a non protected class look like?

Edit: Thanks for correcting my ignorance.
They had a civil rights issue (slavery) the remainder of the states could not ignore.

It is another false equivalency as the PRC has never ruled over Taiwan. And the CSA did not enfranchise their populace fairly. Any such referendum was not an expression of the will of the people but merely the slave holding classes.
Archive link https://archive.is/hZn1d
Since this "community" actually attacked the Capitol I think it's safe to say that they're already radical. Why should we continue to appease them?
The very first thing that popped into my head when I read the title was "Is there some sort of legal agreement when taking the one drug that clashes with some sort of covid related law?"

It's just sloppily written title that ends up asserting something that is baseless, misleading, and untrue.
Parler is removing illegal content and encouragement of violence, they've just been unable to completely do so due to massive growth. They're not like Backpage at all in that regard (and that verdict was harmful regardless). All the violent parleys Amazon mentioned are from nobodies and they have barely any upvotes.

You're right with the second paragraph though, in the US de-facto monopolistic companies are allowed to discriminate their customers regardless of public interest. Visa and Mastercard is allowed to ban Wikileaks from receiving any donations at all (thank God for cryptocurrencies) since they posted info about war crimes and Amazon is allowed to ban social networks that doesn't fact check.

That doesn't mean it shouldn't be that way. Public interests needs some protection, even though companies are the suppliers.
They built literal gallows and chanted "hang Mike Pence."[0] While wondering the building looking for people like Mike Pence with flex cuffs.

This was a violent protest and you are absolutely arguing in bad faith (by ignoring most of what we now know about the events that took place).

[0] https://www.ourquadcities.com/news/national-news/capitol-mob...
Actually Glenn Greenwald is the most credible journalist in my opinion. Who speaks to power no matter what.

I have a word with right wing friends. For years and years you supported removal Palestinian activists from Twitter or any other platform. I think you understand what it feels.
Stop being obtuse. You started with a false premise of it being about buildings in general.
The endgame is private, end-to-end encrypted group chats. Whatsapp is probably used just as much for insurrection planning but it's all dark to Facebook; they don't have to moderate it, because they have no visibility over it. Could be WhatsApp or anything else that offers end-to-end encryption.
There are a lot of rumors right now that the president will spin up his own media service after leaving office. He even hinted at that in his last tweets. Parler recent troubles is maybe opening up a space for him. But I’m curious what steps they will take to avoid this situation. I suspect it will be heavily moderated...
Well, I disagree but I respect the internal consistency. You're a step ahead most of the people supporting this nonsense.
I always wanted to write about this phase of life.

I know they say don't have regrets. But I just can't thinking about it now and then.

In fact, writing this has actually helped in reconciling with it.
You can buy secondhand servers in loads of places with cash purchases. The boys on /r/datahoarder do it all the time. This isn't rocket science, but perhaps I'm overestimating the type of people who would would run a service like Parler.
AWS AUP is pretty ambiguous. I suppose if Pirate Bay and Wikileaks found a way, Parler can too. Honestly, it's a bit surprising they chose AWS at all if they were just using bare metal products as another post suggests

https://aws.amazon.com/aup/
> "This feels like an insane president to be setting."

I think you mean precedent. (But maybe I'm mistaken.)
However Trump doesn't like Chinese companies.

Maybe an european one?
Yes of course there is, along with a motley crew straight out of central casting in bizarre outfits posing for press photos...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_Fire_Decree

'Seizing on the burning of the Reichstag building as the supposed opening salvo in a communist uprising, the Nazis were able to throw millions of Germans into a convulsion of fear at the threat of Communist terror'

For communists read Qanon, proud boys et etc
No, but losing 60-something court cases, many of those with judges appointed by the very same administration fighting this, with many of the attorneys in questions getting their credentials questioned to the border of disbarrment... yeah, I have nothing else to add.
I don't doubt that these companies are acting in their own best interest, if I was in their position I probably would have done the same (well, actually I probably would have done it a whole lot earlier), but that doesn't mean that it's great that corporations have this power. Hell, the fact that these companies are likely actually just doing all this because it's better for their bottom line makes me actually _less_ trusting of them.

Hate speech is definitely an issue, but I want the government, who are democratically elected and (should) serve the people, to take care of it.

Anti-monopoly efforts are nice, but the required scale of them seems incredibly unrealistic for anything that isn't far off into the future.
Especially because it seems likely that for internet companies other countries would simply step in (unless you put up some china like internet firewall...).
No. He is not just talking about reappropriating funds.

He is saying the police must be completely abolished.

The quote begins “By abolishing policing and prisons...”

You seem to have overlooked this somehow.

The name he has chosen for his project is:

“Abolition for the People,
The Movement for a Future Without Policing & Prisons”

It couldn’t be any clearer.
Is there honestly a struggle to tell the difference between a private company and a government? banning rioters from a plane doesn't seem unreasonable. they are not a protected class.
They were literally talking about/planning on attacking the process of peaceful transfer of power from one president to the next.

I'm pretty sure you know why this cannot be tolerated.
> Because building things quickly is important and Rust makes you think a lot about memory management. This is a fine thing for performance critical systems, but for systems where Python’s performance could be described as adequate, the extra performance Rust offers is immaterial. Of course, Rust gives you a bit more type safety than Go as well, but still not enough to justify trading off so much development velocity (or rather, type safety and correctness simply aren’t nearly as important as velocity from an economic perspective).

I think this really depends on the the higher level abstraction you get to use in rust -- case in point being the original post. I'm not sure if this is a result of the rust code just being done that much later but the Rust in there is much simpler to read and understand than getting stated with a golang codebase (whether via kubebuilder, or others) outside of scaffolding your code base -- there's just less moving parts and less noise.

Golang shines when it comes to developer fungibility -- it's simpler to onboard, train, and hire go developers. It's also easier for those developers to make mistakes, but compile type typechecking will constrict the mistake "space" (more so than ruby/python/vanilla js), and performance will get a boost. If Java is the mouse trap because C/C++ were too hard, Go is a better mouse trap on almost every axis (though I think generics in Go 2 are sorely needed).

> Rust is getting better all the time—non-lexical lifetimes and rust-analyzer have provided a surprising improvement in development velocity, but Go is still in another class. Personally I think Go is the best language for developing quickly—even better than Python for non-toy projects (I say that as one with 15 years of Python experience and almost a decade of ago experience).

I agree here, though I personally favor Typescript for building quickly (at least it is for me) if you add Typescript to it. Performance is great because most simple things are not CPU bound at the API layer, ecosystem is enormous (finding value can be difficult), and it's relatively easy to deploy (though Go is easier). I largely stopped keeping track of Go once I'd written some stuff in rust, but I do still recognize it as an excellent choice for building systems quickly and with some (type) protection as opposed to other options, with easy deploys.

I'd love to get your thoughts on recent "modern" Python and it's shiny parts and warts though. I used it last year for a client and found the modern stack to still be pretty disappointing compared to what I knew was possible with server-side JS -- typing use being sort of incomplete still (mypy was a little awkward to use), async still being a little bit awkward, GIL still being a thing.
Beware the naked teenager invasion of congress
According to the GOP, yes. -I- personally support net neutrality however. As well as the net being a need to operate in society.

But the ability to run a workload on AWS? They're a business. I'm totally okay with them deciding to stop doing business with me. That also has a GOP precedent, what with that whole "You don't have to sell a wedding cake to a gay couple" thing.
The message I was replying to (apparently deleted) implied that everyone who voted for Trump is in the same wagon, and Parler is illegitimate simply because it was funded by Trump voters.
That's a shame, I'm somewhat of a free speech absolutist, barring calls for violence and other obvious illegal speech.
Looking into Parlers record on moderation, they don't seem to live up to their own values, removing content that doesn't violate their values, as well as failing to remove content that does.
Right so its less about the technical merits of apps vs websites and more about whether Apple should have to promote them or not.
If a person has a blog and someone comments on a blog post the author’s address and encourages other readers to attack them, is your position that there needs to be due process for the author to remove the comment?

That’s not how freedom of speech works.
Really, anyone using cloud providers should have at least a plan on a side burner to move to another provider if they have to. We've seen cloud accounts canceled for many reasons, including no discernable reason at at all.
I'm just curious, who introduced and signed that act into law?
> there's a miss shooting

The good news is no one will get hurt! :)
I didn't mean to imply slavery wasn't the motivator - but the trigger was the election of a (moderate-ish) anti-slavery president from an anti-slavery party, who explicitly called for the end of admitting new slave states to the Union. Secessions all happened between Lincoln's election and his inauguration, and the declarations of causes almost all cited Lincoln's election as proof of Northern anti-slavery intent.

Similarly, the refusal to accept Trump's loss is rooted in deep gulfs on identity and to a lesser extent on issues. I don't think you can separate the end-of-the-world paranoia from attitudes on BLM, for example.
It was hard question and intentionally so. I allowed you to lie within your boundaries and yet you chose to not answer. You picked zero despite me explicitly stating the only number you could pick was between 1-100$.

If you go outside the framework of a thought experiment, to play safe - we can’t move a discussion forward. So pick a number based on the hypothetical scenario you mentioned. That’s the entire point of a thought experiment, to test boundaries.
It’s interesting that there is one place in this country where protest should be encouraged and that is at the halls of power in Washington DC, and the media feeds the lie that destroying your communities in fire is legitimate protest while being angry at and petitioning your federal government at their seat of power is sedition.

Ask yourself that question, why the reaction to this event?
I'm somewhat dismayed by how many things are having to be rewritten for Deno. A lot of the strength of JS is its ecosystem, and Deno would've had an uphill climb for adoption even if it were a drop-in replacement for Node. If it's basically starting from scratch, that seems bad. I think Deno has a lot of good ideas but I fear this might keep it from taking off.
It's not a Gish Gallop because you've presented "a large number of evidence". It's a Gish Gallop because you've presented a large number of claims (you called out 4 specifically) each of which has extremely thin evidence and, in fact, when someone takes the time to investigate it, it's fairly easily debunked.

I already did #2.

For #1 this is information on Wikipedia about how the underlying data used by the professor was not sufficient to support his conclusions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steven_J._Miller#2020_Election

For #3 here is a reuters post debunking the assertion:

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-oklahoma/fact-c...

For #4 here is a post from some Georgia press (the assertion was about fraud in Georgia) debunking the assertions:

https://www.11alive.com/article/news/politics/elections/fact...
Well, because antifa is not a thing. That's why. Who is the leader of antifa? Where do they organize?

That's what I thought.
Yes, it is. It requires some impressive mental gymnastics to claim that on the one hand you have free speech, and on the other you have no realistic ability to exercise it. A right - especially a natural right - is only a right when it can be meaningfully exercised.

In particular, free speech only applies to speech you don't like, because nobody is attempting to shut down memes of cute kittens.
Parler could of course get back on AWS/Apple/Play Store if they chose to moderate their worst element, but the CEO decided they won’t do that.

I’d guess at least part of his reasoning is because they wouldn’t have enough remaining non-violent conservative voices, because non-violent conservative voices weren’t banned from Twitter/FB etc, the violent and conspiratorial fringe was.