skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
I am currently working on my screenshot API SaaS. This project running on VM (like EC2) as opposed to most similar SaaS running in AWS lambda. I going to move to dedicated server for better performance. The project is working but I still need improve marketing site, multiple regions support, CDN caching, migrate to dedicated servers, billing, etc.

If you sign up now, you basically getting all features for free and without restrictions!

https://www.24browser.com/
> This is about the fact that social media platforms just censored the President of the United States of America for no other reason than their own political views.

First they came for the most powerful person on the planet, and I said nothing...
these are explicitly illegal activities with clearly argued jurisprudence. perhaps what parler hosted was illegal, but that should be up to a court to decide, not amazon.
Unless they had a contingency plan in place Parler is dead. There's no way a site that big could be moved in 7 days. ESPECIALLY if they used the vendor lock-in features of AWS.
Thank you for mentioning that Parler do moderate when it goes against their desired message.

This is the crux of the issue. Not only is Parler NOT moderating hate speech on their platform, they pretend as if moderation is anathema to their model, thereby further enforcing the views of their users as all encompassing. They exist for the sole reason to provide a particular community, one that is fomenting insurrection and terrorism.
Another day, another 400M Tether minted
This comment is being brigaded so I’m removing it.
> So AWS is now the arbiter of what actions are supposedly harmful to the fabric of democratic society?

No, everybody is. In a democratic society, it is the responsibility of every citizen and corporation to act in accordance with democratic values.

At the end of the day, democracies aren't built out of laws written on paper -- they're built on the everyday decisions people take such as voting, arguing over issues, and condemning non-democratic bad actors.

Just as people can protest in the streets against undemocratic abuses of power, so corporate entities can and should deplatform people and organizations that explicitly, violently threaten our democracy.

It's up to every person and corporation to be their own arbiter. That's the ultimate safeguard of democracy.

If AWS waited for a court order, it could very well be too late.
> They are standing up for what they believe in.

They think of themselves as patriots, as John Wilkes Booth did:

> He had spent so much time among like-minded people who hated Lincoln, and he had read so many accounts denouncing Lincoln as a tyrant bent on destroying the Constitution and "personal liberty" that he expected to be hailed as a hero.

> Instead he was stunned to learn that he was being hunted down like a beast, while Lincoln was held up throughout much of the nation as a martyred saint.

> Source for this: The bibliography in my biography of Lincoln.

* https://twitter.com/Teri_Kanefield/status/134722988063564595...

> “This is not America,” a woman said to a small group, her voice shaking. She was crying, hysterical. “They’re shooting at us. They’re supposed to shoot BLM, but they’re shooting the patriots.”

* https://archive.is/tZVFs (for paywall)

* https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/capitol-trump-ins...
This seems like a completely reasonable response.
Why don’t they use GitHub pages or something decentralized?
If you're intention is to gain weight (not just muscle) you need to eat more than your BMR, no two ways around that. A decent surplus (say 200-300 calories above BMR) and a good program is key.
Also, there is this standard. It's senseless to allow unlimited extension of a particular freedom to implode the system that provides those freedoms in the first place. Also related to the paradox of tolerance concept.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Constitution_is_not_a_suic...
So you'd be fine with platforms purging anything critical of them?

I guess in theory I wouldn't have an issue with that, but in practice a lot most of the time there isn't really an alternative.
Why not? Deplatform all the politicians -- at least the 95% who actively lie and work against the interests of the American people. While we're at it, kick them out of Washington on their asses. Nothing of value will be lost.
Dfinity quietly launched the 'Internet Computer' mainnet last month
I agree, but think it is the creators retribution piece that is important, and that it does not have to take the form of advertisement.
What about when the Black Panthers brought guns into the California state Capitol?

Should society have said “no further?”
Finally a futurologist i can relate to. Beat Kurzeweil hollow.
They don't need to change the rules. AWS can already terminate you at any point. In this case, they've very much not explicitly done that, and instead have given Parler warnings and clear requests to take specific actions to prevent their account from being terminated.

Parler has decided not to cooperate, and Amazon is taking the next step, which is terminating that relationship.

Amazon is a business, and can choose to do business with just about anyone they'd like, based on their stated terms. This isn't some weird turning point, and in fact, the email provided shows that Amazon isn't making this decision out of nowhere.
Regarding the "FIRE!" analogy - there are journalists such as Glenn Greenwald arguing that media and politicians fearmongering the specter of right wing terrorism are the becoming the ones yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded movie theater, and the mass deplatforming of regular conservative groups and proposed Patriot Act 2.0 measures that will ensue is the movie theater suffering disproportionate and unnecessary harm as a result.
> this is exactly what the right side thinks is happening to them. Each side thinks its the other.

The symmetry is pretty shallow, though. If you look past the grievances about being criticized and ostracized by the other side and dig into the underlying public policy goals, it's pretty easy to spot categorical differences. When a BLM protestor talks about equal protection under law, they're referring to not getting shot by the government. When an alt-right protestor can be coaxed into listing the ways in which their legal rights are being infringed, they start bringing up stuff like the right to fire someone for being LGBTQ.
Hypothetically, how would you go about staying online completely independently?

Let's say you build your own data center, buy the real estate (because a landlord could be pressured to cancel your lease), purchase all the network equipment, and hire your own full-time employees.

You still need to lease an IP block and a fiber connection from a carrier (like AT&T, Century Link, etc.). Couldn't they deplatform you too? Is there any law that says AT&T etc. cannot refuse service? Otherwise, is there any way to get an indie data center on the internet without going through any other company?

Every other utility seems to be regulated. For example even if you have a Confederate flag or a picture of Stalin outside your house, the local electric and water companies are not allowed to turn off your service as long as you are paying the bill.
You see the same unhinged types on left leaning platforms. Online forums attract the fringe loudmouths. Parler is not representative of modern US conservatism. I call myself conservative and I've never in my life visited the site.

https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/9rvroo/most...

Edit: to be clear, in context, I am saying that these nutjob posters on Parler are not representative. I understand that mainstream conservatives may also have a presence there.
Companies already fire people for ideological differences. Brendan Eich is the obvious example. The reason you don't get "purges" (ie, mass firings) is because people know just how likely they are. You shut your mouth during the "diversity" struggle sessions and similar rubbish. You keep your campaign contributions to 200 dollars or less. You sure as hell don't associate political speech to your PID. You are mindful of cross pollination between databases.

This is how we live now.
It's not hard to make an argument that referring to Amazon warehouse employees as slaves is violent speech, for example.

For example Twitter argued [1] that Trumps statement of "75 million American patriots" could refer to the hundreds of Capitol rioters and that his statement of him not attending the inauguration, which Biden supports btw, was a signal that it's a safe target to attack.

[1] https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspensio...
> purposefully attracted the absolute dregs of society

Have Parler done anything specific to attract extremists, other than taking a hard stance on free speech?
Just going by their splash page, and values page, I don't see anything that indicates they have.

The fact that it's user base may be overwhelmingly "dregs" seems to just be a function of the lack of free speech in mainstream platforms.
A parler message quoted in this article:

“On Jan * we need to start systematically assassinating liberal leaders, liberal activists, BLM activists...”

I’m not on parler but it seems like this stuff is not uncommon there and since they aren’t a huge company it seems like it would be tough to moderate it.

I consider myself to be a proponent of free speech, but I also think you are crazy if you don’t put limits on it.
Deploying Wagtail on CentOS8 with MariaDB/Nginx/Gunicorn
> if you don't like twitter censorship, build a new platform". It will be built. What then?

Even more polarization in society; both groups talking only to themselves, zero dialogue between the groups and no chance to hear an opposing opinion (you had that one with twitter). i hope this won't be the prelude to a more serious rift occuring in the real world.
Nope, AWS is just the arbiter of what actions they allow to be hosted on their product. Of course no one is suggesting that Amazon or any one technology company is the sole arbiter of claims about morality or legality.
It seems the Space Shuttle’s orange fuel tank should’ve been a flyback booster. It’s fuel was connected to the shuttle main engines via a tube. And the main engines were useless in space, once the tank was de-staged.

The tank burned up in the atmosphere. But it would’ve been nice if it flew back and landed instead.
I think the best plan of action is creating a new decentralized free speech platform, as resilient as a cockroach, blockchain or scihub.

I’ve sent a message to sama & pg asking to add this to the YC list of ‘requests for startups’. I hope they hear.

For those lurking, this is a tremendous opportunity and real need as you have half the country desperate to let their voice be heard while being aggressively silenced and de-platformed for political reasons.

You can have a monopoly on free speech.. just kidding , purely decentralized. Hit me up with your hot ideas and Go chops.
Who decides who the the extremists are?
I signed up for Parler and just get updates from Tulsi Gabbard. I didn’t realize I was such a revolutionary.
Everyone saying this is a slippery slope to tech companies regulating speech are being completely ridiculous.

https://twitter.com/IntelDoge/status/1348099918381068289

Check the images there. People are literally planning murder on Parler and people are acting as if AWS, Apple, etc should not do anything. Parler REFUSES to remove these posts.

I could see if it was something other than murder, or violence but I can't take anyone serious who is ok with all the craziness on Parler.

I would completely agree with any conservative or person of any political persuasion if AWS, Apple, etc were deplatforming Parler for their political views.

When did it become controversial to try to stop companies that people are using to organize violent acts ?

Additional Parler posts about murdering people from https://www.reddit.com/r/ParlerWatch/

[1] https://preview.redd.it/q8szoz0pcda61.jpg?width=640&crop=sma...

[2] https://i.redd.it/56siiqv8fda61.jpg

[3] https://i.redd.it/k1fgbg59fda61.jpg
What do you mean by incessant labeling?
Now that Parler also is booted from AWS, it's basically "build a new internet".

"Build your own services if you like free speech so much" was never a honest proposition. It was a "shut up" proposition - because when, to the surprise of the censors, it was built and was successful, they took all possible measures to destroy it. They were never for "we will have our own and you can have our own" - it always was "we will control everything and you will shut up and do what you told".

Whatever are your political leanings and whatever you think of Trump or Parler - if this thing - total and absolute control of a handful of corporations over what can be spoken on the internet, and their willingness to ruthlessly exercise this control to suppress any non-censorious companies - if this thing is not scaring you, you're delusional. You probably think you will never commit wrongthink so it doesn't apply to you. Read some history, it never worked this way, it won't work this way this time either. Censorship, allowed to run free, always gets worse.
Nothing is stopping them nor was anything stopping them before. So this changes nothing except for Parker and the people using it.
"And product marketing and placement has absolutely no affect on how one think something taste is good or bad"

Yes it odes.

"My 7 years old nephew hasn't watched a single Coca Cola coke in his life time"

1) It's ridiculous to say a 7 year old 'has never seen an add for coke'.

How would you possibly know that? Unless they are living as the Amish, that kid as seen ads.

2) That someone will prefer one drink over another is not relevant to the argument.

Nobody is making the claim that 'ads make you do stuff'. No Coke ad is going to 'force Pepsi drinkers to like Coke'.

Ads are influential. They root the product in feelings, emotions, those have impact, which is why advertising is there.

3) Your nephew was probably drinking code from some age, maybe as a treat. It was Coke and not some Italian cola, because Coke has such a powerful market position.

In Italy, they drink Brio and it's quite good, you can't even get it here, if you could, people would drink it.

Coke spends billions on ads because they work not because they don't.
I'm pretty okay with silencing racism, fascism, nationalism, and misogynism, myself. How about you?
Slippery slope does not mean "a thing I don't like" happened. Amazon had multiple, clear asks that Parler refused to adopt. They didn't even delete posts that Amazon had sent to them and informed them were problematic. That's literally the bare minimum.
The thing is that Trump did never incite or use hate speech. He did the opposite. He said stay peaceful. Go Home. Yet he was censored of social media!
Parler totally should migrate to Alibaba Cloud.
Anyone know Parler’s tech stack? What do they use AWS for? Are they all serverless or primarily using S3 and RDS or maybe DynamoDB?
Note that someone approving of one particular action by AWS does not imply that person approves of all actual or hypothetical actions that AWS might take. That’s absurd.
I can't tell if you're spreading misinformation on purpose.
You're referring to the American Nazi party as "the left".

From your link: "his Neo-Nazi group, the NSPA, would regularly hold demonstrations in Marquette Park".

Firstly: you're mislabeling the radical right wing.
Secondly: they they're right wing goes against your point.

Are you confused because "national socialist" (which is what nazi stands for) has the word socialist?
The tech monopolies will go to any length and use any excuse to protect their monopoly power. Looks like they're now in the backscratching business.

This is just a pretext for them to do what they would have found an excuse to do anyway.
They're barely read, they have like 5 upvotes. You can't expect a startup with insane growth to employ hundreds of people in a week.
> Do they do it because they enjoy bringing a diverse set of viewpoints together to create something that couldn't be created in isolation? That might have a better chance of success.

That reminds me of the phrase:

If you want to go fast go alone. If you want to go far go together.
right, if the people on parler are such a threat surely CPS should be taking their kids into protective custody. does anyone know if that's happening?
So AWS is now the arbiter of what actions are supposedly harmful to the fabric of democratic society?

It'd be great if people could move past these extremely cliche arguments and start addressing substantive ones instead of living in some theoretical free speech bubble where a meritocracy of ideas and the superiority of truth are assumed as implicit, without regard to real-world experience.
Just don't storm the capitol with zip ties and guns chanting "hang mike pence" bro
Law enforcement are involved; they were photographed at the capitol assisting the invaders.
So you provide the tools for users to moderate their own content,. I understand that my email provider has a spam filter, but it would be unacceptable if I was unable to tweak those settings myself. Why do we expect anything less from social media?
ISPs should be common carriers. Unfortunately the current administration disagrees.
People are literally planning to murder other people on Parler but you don't find the content compelling ? There are tons of posts like this on Parler. This isnt a slippery slope, they arent moderating at all

https://twitter.com/IntelDoge/status/1348099918381068289
1000km battery range. That's.. quite some claim.
I think the next couple of years are gonna be great, for me, but maybe not for you.
Society did. That, in part, motivated gun control laws that followed. Signed by Governor Reagan and supported by the NRA. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulford_Act
Was expecting to see a clip of Dante and Randal climbing up the building of Leonardo Leonardo. Your clip makes more sense.
Yes, the fact that they’re allowed to make business decisions about their own platforms and freely associate is the bedrock of capitalism. Read the fine print. Plan accordingly.
Another view is about what services on the internet should be considered a commons, particularly as more interaction shifts to online rather than in-person spaces. Physical commons are regulated through local action and laws with some basis in democratic action. Online commons are generally near-absolute dictatorships run by a for-profit company where the only restrictions are minor government regulations that would make them liable for users' actions under certain circumstances. Otherwise, any commons can purge users for essentially any reason with no input from those using the commons.

I won't suggest solutions to this at the moment other than to say there are more options that providing democratic power over existing private commons. There could be public online commons that are guaranteed to meet certain standards, for example, and for private spaces to not compete and subsume them. Though this is speaking vaguely - there are many potential discussions to have about what a public digital commons could look like.
I guess the current consensus in the US is that it's okay for companies and medias to be arbitrators of what's wrong and what's right. What I don't understand is why companies have double standards. For instances below, a politician, a media anchor, and a random singer. They didn't incite violence?

-- Khamenei wanted to eradicate a people: https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/1003332853525110784?l...

-- Chris Cuomo said protests didn't need to be peaceful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezGyemHna_k

-- A rapper sang about how to rob Chinese families because "they don't believe in bank accounts": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFxOsUe0I8o

And what about this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRnmnxVtDqg That's okay because the right people claimed that Kavanaugh was a rapist?
The plural of city is cities.
That was the ROC government's position at one point (I think it isn't anymore since 1991), but the situation with the popular opinions is considerably more complicated.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_status_of_Taiwan#Pos...
Well the entirety of the US that doesn't ignore science or peddle conspiracy theories has easily decided yes. Not sure why you are even asking. 5 people dead. Continued threats for more. What more do you need?
Actually businesses should and must decide these things for themselves. A lot of stores now enforce rules for customers to wear masks, without any legal mandate or ruling by courts that masks are mandatory. It's good business, because your other customers won't want to shop at your store if they don't feel safe in a pandemic.

Likewise, tech companies have the right to decide what is good business for themselves. Hosting a platform where insurrection and violence is being organized, will turn off your other customers and your employees.

Are we saying no to free markets and private enterprise getting to choose good business decisions for themselves now?
Ironically

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/08/jeff-bezos-guilloti...
That's not how it works. Instead, politicians are deplatforming what they want. You don't control the process, they do. Even if in the moment they deplatform people that you dislike, never think you have any control over it.
> I fail to see why I should be concerned with people who have evinced an utter lack of concern for me.

Because you are on the same boat with them. If they overturn the boat, you'll fall into the water.

I do not say that it is easy to be concerned, it is hard, because it leaves mind in the state of uncertainty: there are no known ways to tackle the problem. There are different ways to deal with it, but all simple ways (like throw them all over the board) are not acceptable and probably wouldn't work (some tried and it didn't turn well). These simple ways could bring mind into the state of peace: everything is decided, no uncertainty, they are the bad guys, we are the good ones, but what is more important to you: the peace of mind or a thinking process constantly seeking for ways to tackle a problem?

People mostly choose peace of mind, because they have other problems to worry about. I do not blame them, anxiety is a thing that makes life worse. But as for me, people might be better if they learned how to live with uncertainty without having to worry about the part of uncertainty that is out of their control.
Why is this not a terrorism site to you?

It's been used to conduct a terrorist attack this week. It's being used to plan a terrorist attack in the coming days.

The creators were given a chance to clean house and take measures. They haven't.

So why is this not a terrorist platform in your mind? Is there a belief that Americans cannot be terrorists?

Edit: you added a clarification that these are not official terrorist groups as classified by intelligence agencies. However white supremacists are considered to be significant terrorist threats by many agencies. (https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/04/white-supremacists-...). Parler is a haven for unchecked white supremacy. Therefore it is reasonably classifiable as a terrorist site
Is someone assuming that? It’s perfectly normal to approve of AWS banning Parler while reserving the right to disapprove of AWS banning some other service. I’m very confused by this mode of argument “if we ever let any company perform any action that’s a slippery slope because what if they perform other actions???”

Nothing is stopping them from changing their rules. But if they change their rules from something good to something bad, one simply changes one’s opinion of their rules.
They did. That's when California started going big on gun control.