skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Mainstream conservatives haven't been deplatformed. That's just the prevailing excuse for why many of them radicalized.
So Amazon, Apple and Google should intentionally keep Parler around as a honeypot to snag right wing terrorists and the rest of society should just pretend we don’t know how they keep getting arrested?
At some physical level (e.g. the backbone), I'd like to see laws that apply the 1st amendment to all US-controlled physical connectivity i.e. backbone operators cannot block traffic based on content, ever.

Above that, I'd prefer to see a more diverse business ecosystem so that AWS' business policies were just one of a larger set of possible choices you would have when picking a hosting solution (note: this doesn't just mean more companies, it means greater diversity of the AUPs on offer)

At that point, we could all do what I consider to be the right thing, and leave AWS or whoever to do whatever they want, confident that there were genuine alternatives available.
Ask HN: My 11 year old child wants to learn programming, where to start?
My 11 year old has expressed interest in learning to program. His primary inspiration is games. I would assume this is common, although not how I got started. I’d like any thoughts, suggestions, or resources anyone may have. Thanks.
For something you seem to think is "pretty rare"... I know quite a few people who would gladly discriminate against LGBTQ.

Indeed, a May 2020 Gallup poll says that 32% believe that same-sex consensual relations are wrong and 24% of the US believe that same-sex consensual relations should be illegal. So not only do they want to be able to not hire, they want people who like the same sex to face legal consequences.
I'm open to be persuaded, but initial impression is a lot of bullshit there.

The main finding from an admittedly quick look is that drinking artificially sweet soda may encourage people to eat more calories and gain weight. If you're controlling your calorie intake then that's irrelevant.

Outside of that other claims seem highly questionable.

I push back a little on this, because most of the time I've heard people say diet soda is as bad or worse than regular it's because of unsubstantiated woo. Is drinking only water better for you? I'd guess almost certainly.

Is diet soda particularly harmful? I doubt it - and it's almost certainly better than regular soda (or all of those high sugar fancy juices). It can also be really helpful when losing a lot of weight as a zero calorie snack.
What a brilliant idea, if this trend continues conservatives soon be forced to move to darknet forums/social networks that doesn't even try to remove content encouraging violence.
I feel like you are proving his point? Can you imagine the authoritarian lockdowns if hundreds of US politicians were killed?

Every remaining politician would do everything in their power to not have that happen again, regardless of the constitutionality of those actions.
Are you telling me that Twitter and Facebook have 100% coverage on their platforms? Ha!
Starve fascism of air? Isn’t it obvious?
Nevermind the ziptie handcuffs and tasers
Parler are free to spin up their own servers.
Of all the bans, placing people who were at a violent, anti-government "protest" on the no-fly list actually seems like the most defensible one.
It is smart of them not to rely on proprietary AWS services.

I suggest migrating to Alibaba Cloud.
I think OP's point is that if you're only reporting on violent stuff, it's going to look 100% violent, even if the majority of the content is not.

Violence-inducing content is obviously not okay, but it's not fair to ignore literally everything else and then claim 100% of content is violent.
This is what feel like Authoritarianism? Not the attempted theft of a legitimate democratic election?
The number of users that almost pulled off an insurrection is pretty small.
The article says somebody parked 2 blocks away and left bombs and guns in their truck. Doesn’t that make you think the perps did not have guns and bombs while they were perpetrating?
This is true. Revolutions need not be violent. It's simply the case that the vast majority are. Revolutionary socialism does not reject revolution simply because it may be violent. Rather, it accepts violence as a possible necessary means to an end.
That's interesting news. Do you have a link?
Businesses can refuse service for any reason unless it's a reason prohibited by law. It is annoying that terms of service have broad sweeping language on prohibited uses but it is impossible to list every possible scenario.
> other than taking a hard stance on free speech?

Every platform created for this reason that gains a large following does so specifically because it attracts people who recently got banned from some previous existing service for being terrible. See 8Chan post gamergate or Voat post-banning of r/fatpeoplehate. Not saying it's wrong to be pro-all-kinds-of-speech-allowed-on-platform-that-you-run, but those kinds of platforms usually only surge in popularity when a bunch of people get banned from a more mainstream platform where being a dick is against the rules.

Edit: don't want to make it sound like big tech companies like Twitter / FB and Amazon are "good" for doing this. They're only doing this because they feel pressure to do so. If the execs had a moral compass, they would treat every user the same, and ban people based on the same set of rules.
Agree or disagree, this seems like a step that's going to have massive implications. Optics aside, this foresages an entire cloud/tech ecosystem developing to cater to this set of users, not unlike the ones developing in other countries with "different" values from the "western" ones. Time will tell what this means to the US as a country and any reconcilement that might have to happen if things can ever get back to sanity.
I think everyone is missing the context. The technology companies don't care about anything except making sure the new Biden government doesn't regulate them.

Trump was looking into this in his final weeks so they're more than happy to pile on. Now Biden has an opportunity to extend government control into more facets of people's lives and Democrats never waste an opportunity to nudge us towards totalitarianism. The technology companies know this, so they may be making a "See? We're woke too! We agree with you - we banned all the Conservatives just like you would have anyway - no need to regulate" statement. The problem is, it may end up being a Faustian bargain.
Nothing stops the Trump org from doing what InfoWarz does and sign up with Akamai and Lumen/Centurylink/Level 3 for their server hosting and CDN.
Seems like they are combing profile key words and punting users the last 24 hours. Harmless phrases, acronyms from words Kennedy said. Nothing hateful or inciting but does label them as identifying with a certain spirit or community.
If you hire a hitman, both you and the hitman are guilty. I think the same standard could apply here.
It's a damning indictment of "big tech" that it took Democrats having a trifecta in federal government and a violent mob breaking into the Capitol during a congressional session to get this level of investment in moderating, well after the hate on their platform has metastasized.
Yeah, all the venerated housewives are going to use tor and visit onion links. Listen to yourself, you’re desperate and grasping.
If people on an app continually call for violence and violate your TOS you can boot them off. Especially if the app in question has no good faith moderation of content to meet your terms of service and their terms of service are either lacking or wink wink levels of enforcement.

You can have ANY political perspective you want! Lower taxes, raise taxes, immigration policy, school choice, charter schools WHATEVER! You just can’t have hate speech against protected classes or call for violence. If you have an issues with the protected classes then VOTE!!! Also debate on what should and shouldn’t be a protected class is also OK!

These companies exist to make money. They have a fiduciary duty to shareholders. Aiding and abetting political violence is a sure fire way to hurt shareholder value. The market has judged that “pro violence” speech is to be de-monetized.
Holding a press conference means that the message gets filtered through media companies with their own agendas (OAN or CNN; pick your poison).

The Internet is meant to dis-intermediate communication.
That is its purpose. It's one of the things that makes it such a disruptive change over legacy media platforms.
The current de-platforming trend is an attempt to put that genie back in the bottle.
Comment on r/aws:

>I am praying and hoping that Parler chose to use DynamoDB, Cognito, API GW, lambda functions, SnS//SQS , Cloudwatch etc. :-D
oh! thanks for the chuckle! needed that today.
If Hawaiians elect a state government with that goal, and then pass a referendum with high turn out I'd be open to considering it.

But it's a false equivalency anyway given that:

1. No such efforts are underway.

2. Taiwan is not presently part of the PRC.

3. Taiwan merely seeks de jure recognition of its de facto independence.
That is a pretty cool idea. I would never consider standing still at a standing desk (uncomfortable for me), but walking would make it bearable at least for a while. Probably couldn't do it all day though.
PWAs are blockaded from a ton of native functionality (push notifications etc.) on iOS. They are much more level with native apps on Android, but still lack access to many native features.

The distinction is important if you believe you should be able to run whatever software you want on a piece of general purpose hardware you purchase.
But they said, in not so many words, that if the platforms are going to hold normal users to a standard, they should hold public figures to an equal (or IMO, greater) standard instead of letting them have more privileges. I don’t really see a problem with that, except for how deadpan the delivery is.

They don’t because pandering pays the bills. But if pandering doesn’t bother you, there are more lucrative forms and you can just do away with the pretense and get to the pandering.
I would argue the public is at a much higher risk of being tricked by giant monopolistic media organisations with very private interests than fringe lunatics. Murdoch was bad, but at least you didn't have to communicate through his tabloids.

Underneath all of this seems to be this assumption that Zuckerberg, Jack Dorsey etc. are benevolent, and won't betray you. Putting aside whether that's right, it's incredibly short-sighted. Jack Dorsey owns 2% of Twitter's stock. Twitter is owned by index funds - they have control, not Jack. You don't want private equity dictating what kind of propaganda you're allowed to see.
This is what happens when you live in your own bubble and don't even bother to talk to Trump supporters and look past the memes and trolling. The memes and trolling were a necessary part of "waking the sheeple" discourse from what I understand Trumpism is. There is a World beyond all that which only those who have looked past the memes and trolling can actually understand. But given that you live in your own safe bubble you'll never know it. That's the whole point of this situation. We are already living in a balkanized internet where everyone has found their ideological safe zones and no one is willing to learn and engage with the other. It is exact opposite to what the internet was in the 90s and 2000s where you would actively seek out people with different ideologies and characters - especially the odd and crazy ones. It is sad to see this happen because I have seen how internet evolved since the 90s. It was a fun place. It is no more. Now we have mapped our real life to virtual life to such an extent that we have melted the barrier that existed in the beginning. Internet was a place where you could assume any identity and would get respect from everyone and be treated the same. A 13 year old kid could interact with a 50 year old adult on programming topics and both wouldn't know their real identities except for the discussion at hand. That internet doesn't exist anymore.
If Donald Trump holds a press conference and nobody comes, does it make a sound?
ISIS was famous for radicalizing people around the world thanks to their publicly shared content on the internet. I say we let them fester in the shadows where these awful ideas will have fewer vectors of minds to infect.
Parler failed to moderate to the standards of Facebook, Amazon, and Twitter, oh my
This is wildly incorrect. ' Q anon supporters storming the capitol with guns, zip ties, and pipe bombs, chanting "hang mike pence' is a dangerous media fantasy. A huge number of people demonstrated, a tiny number broke the law.
We are entering very dangerous, 1930's Reichstag like 'problem, reaction, solution' authoritarianism with these free speech crack downs. Patriot Act 2.0 is ready to go versus 'domestic terrorists'.
And yet, Republicans (let's not argue who's a true conservative) have continued to put a lot of effort into fighting against LGBTQ protections in recent years.

On the subject of "enabling the suppression of their fellow man", the only really hot-button issue for Republicans that can truly be framed as them defending against their own rights being suppressed is gun control. The rest of their major issues either fall on the wrong side of suppression, or aren't really about somebody being suppressed in any direct way.
Let’s try it your way. You can put 1% of your fortune in all those assets you mentioned. Hopefully, you will see the point in trying to make about asset allocation.

On a side note, sarcasm and snark don’t aid better understanding in a discussion. I appreciate your point but it would be better made being direct.
Compare how many millions of desktop PCs there are in the world, versus the billions of mobile devices.
You’re repeating the same absurdity I outlined. There’s a big difference between saying “that company is free to make that decision” and “I approve of that decision by that company.” Approving of one decision does not imply being bound to approve of all future decisions of that company.
>Technically, Parlor the company didn't do anything you mentioned? They failed to moderate - but I mean, so has Facebook? So has the comment section of my old blog from 2001?

What does Facebook have to do with the current discussion? Facebook isn't hosted on Amazon.

>Taken one step further, what is the difference between Parlor and AWS in this case - technically speaking, the calls for violence were on AWS's platform after all...

I guess I don't understand what you're getting at. It was indeed on AWS's platform. As part of hosting content on AWS you agree to not allow content calling for violence against others. They failed to moderate their users, so Amazon is moderating them.
It does unless you expect them to work for free and pay for their own operations somehow.
If their business plan really was to monetize psychotic content then why did they ever even consider aws as a host?

There are offshore type hosts who leave up pretty much everything short of cp.
I'm not sure what your point is in quoting this. It very clearly is not incitement to violence. The objective he describes for the demonstration is that it will help convince legislators to vote the way he wants them to, by showing that lots of people feel the way he does. Being able to engage in such demonstrations is absolutely at the core of political freedom.

Perhaps that was the point you were trying to make, of course.
It’s safe to promote hate they said... not.
TIL Parler was all free speech.

When did they co-opt HN? ;)
Because a major news event happened just a few days ago that removed all ambiguity or uncertainty about the seriousness of the issue.
They do have a responsibility to allow customers to migrate in reasonable time frames. This move tells every other AWS customer: “be ready to move at a moments notice.” That’s not a good thing for AWS.
ISPs are not legally responsible under under the communications decency act. That doesn't make them completely immune to legal consequences. For example, Section 230 definitely doesn't supercede an NSL.

Invoking it also doesn't let you reclaim a DoD contract you lost, or restore public opinion of your company.

(also, protip for trying to convince anybody of anything: don't start out with an assumption that the person you're talking to is ignorant. Replying with "read up on..." is always insulting)
> A nuclear barrage of Chinese military facilities

Do you really want to entertain this ridiculous idea?

A nuclear assault on Chinese soil, would invite a nuclear retaliation on American soil.

Do you really want to lose Los Angeles or New York City, to a nuclear ICBM?

And if it comes that, then both sides should just launch all their nukes, and see who is left afterwards to pick up the pieces.

America is now a nuclear wasteland. And all because some people couldn’t swallow their pride, and realize that Taiwan is not their core interest.
> Communism survived Stalin death untouch

Soviet Communism survived, it did not survive unchanged.

> it became more stable as Stalin was driver of instability at the top.

Asimov would, based on the fairly explicit statements in the review on the topic, say that it got more stable precisely because it became less totalitarian.

I’m not interested in arguing whether Asimov is right on this point, but it is indefensible to claim that his painting of Stalinism as tyranny that was explicitly repudiated as such by later Soviet Communism is an apologia for Stalinism.
> Soft drinks are fucking diabetes in a can.

Actually, so is juice - the amount of sugar is pretty much the same in both, and the amount of vitamins in juice is not that big, certainly does not outweight the damage done by sugar.

The secret is to eat fruits whole - this gives you a lot of vitamins that are contained in the solid parts (those which are thrown away when squeezing juice), and a lot of fiber which makes you feels satiated much faster, before you take in too much sugar.
I'm not fully informed on what content triggered these decisions by Google and Apple but if people are worried about too much power concentrations then the right approach for Parler is to sue and see how the court system decides whether these decisions were legal. Assuming the society as a whole has faith in the judicial system.
Arch Linux, AUR, etc, tryuck Plebian!
Nine firearms plus one long gun, one container of molotovs, several pipe bombs, and two IEDs were seized by police. Additionally several released chemical agents at police. One beat a police officer to death with a fire extinguisher. One was photographed with a set of zip tie restraints.

And that's just what was captured obviously. Presumably for everything found there were several more things concealed.
No, that was pulled off because Lin Wood didn't want to leave a paper trail. Fortunately, many have taken screenshots.
Not if we know their names and shame anyone who sells them hardware, they won't be.
Sorry, what are you referring to? Would love to see links to police stations being burnt by organized groups.
No American administration ever thought "let's placate Beijing because we are too scared of them getting angry". Every time the decision to compromise with Beijing was made based on a certain trade-off.

This is no different today. The US military and civilian experts believe that if Taiwan declares independence, Beijing will use its military to take control of Taiwan, regardless of the US involvement. US presidents do not want several million people to die for the cause of Taiwan independence. Of course, most presidents do not care much about Chinese or Taiwanese deaths, but they do care that this will hurt the US economy and business interests; and depending on how things play out, thousands of Americans may also die, which is bad for reelection.

In other words, the US administrations do not want Taiwan to declare independence. They do, however, like to use Taiwan as a pawn in their games with China, just like they would use an aircraft carrier near the Chinese coast. They also like to use Taiwan as a pawn in the internal US political wars, for example by creating difficulties for the opposite party before that party takes over the White House.
not generalizing. new marist polling shows ~20% of Republicans approved of the supporters breaking into the US capitol. back of napkin math puts that around 16 million people.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/most-americans-blame-t...
What things? Burning down small businesses, attacking people and creating 'autonomous zones'?
Putting your money where your mouth is both expensive in time and money. Talking is free. I stopped trying to explain bitcoin in 2012
This is completely your opinion and not necessarily true for any person who reads your comments. I used YNAB for 120 days when it had longer trials. It didn’t do enough for me. It was more annoying for me than any potential savings.

Bird’s eye view has been much more helpful as a middle ground. Not Mint and technically i can budget, but I’m not too interested in that.
That's it - webp isn't treated as a first-class picture file format even on Windows. You can hardly expect Apple being more progressive this way.
Terrorists are usually added to no-fly lists, yeah?
Exactly, Centurylink demonstrated a couple months ago they alone could take down and disrupt IPV4 traffic worldwide. I'm starting to wonder if that was a simple configuration mistake or a pre-run.
Only really necessary if you plan to be the unmoderated sump where all the people kicked off of Twitter end up. Different services have different risk profiles.
> both sides are behaving the same.

Literally only one side stormed the capitol during a joint session of congress in an attempt to overthrow the election, so "behaving the same" is stretched pretty far here. By pretending both sides are the same, it would appear you are the one spinning and rationalizing.

I mean, let's not forget that Donald Trump of all people called into question the results of his own win in 2016 by claiming that 3 million people voted illegally, and that people were being bussed to New Hampshire to vote against him. He even formed a commission to investigate this "fraud"! So any impressions that the vote was illegitimate were flamed by the winner himself!
I think Amazon, Apple and Google should rely on the authorities to tell them what can and can’t legally be present on their platform. If something is already clearly illegal, then sure, take action immediately, but there has not been any mention of what Parler is allowing to be illegal. If it’s deemed illegal then I fully support deplatforming.
Not without due process.
The issue is that then a lot of very toxic people will go to that platform and there will be a lot of very toxic content. Then all the people who aren't toxic will leave the platform because they don't want to be subjected to that content. Then advertisers will leave because they don't want their brands associated with that content. Then app stores will drop the app because they don't want their brands associated with that content. Then the platform essentially dies or stagnates.
We Need to Be Better Losers
If harmful is planning impending terrorists attacks, they should also be removed, yes.

People weren’t and aren’t up in arms when Isis gets deplatformed.
The United States will be done in by... stamping out the free expression of openly organizing to commit sedition against the United States.

Spare us.
> Around a third want to unify with the CCP.

I am from Taiwan. Where does the data for your sentence come from? As far as I know, the proportion of people who want to be unified with CCP is only 2.4%.

Reference: https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7804&id=6960
Do you join specific subreddit for that? or do you join several subs?

Did you mean this MeFi? https://www.metafilter.com

I think I don't get what SA is here, do you mind pointing the web?