@metal-brain saidI think Gab is the best.
I am suspicious that Parler is the only other social media with a no censorship policy that the corporate news media will mention. I noticed Ted Cruz and Rand Paul endorsed Parler.
I'm not sure I would embrace something the corporate news media is telling us about and not the others. Is Parler popular with the numbers to back it up? Why is it Parler and not Minds?
...[text shortened]... Minds. Parler takes too long to respond like it is to install some spyware or something. Why Parler?
However, their servers are getting a bit overpowered today, with big guys like PeterSweden jumping on over.
But they run their own servers, and they receive the bulk of their pay through cryptocurrency. They have a very bright future.
@eladar saidIf a baker refuses to bake a cake for a black gay couple, is that his choice or should there be State intervention to force him to comply?
@huckleberryhound
Of course the puppets of the political machine are going to squash free speech. They need everyone getting only the propaganda they want people to believe.
Now, if a business doesn’t want their platform abused to spread right-wing propaganda, hate-speech or paranoid delusions, is that their choice? Or should there be State intervention to force them to allow it?
It seems, to me, you want to eat your cake and keep it too.
Here is an article from last June. Here is an ironic excerpt:
"Last Friday, Twitter hid a tweet from Trump that included the phrase “when the looting starts, the shooting starts” behind a warning label citing a (rarely enforced) policy against “glorifying violence.” And Snapchat on Wednesday said it would no longer promote Trump’s posts on its “Discover” page — curated content from prominent accounts — because, well, he’s Trump.
Zuckerberg has plainly realized that he can’t go down that road and still claim Facebook is a simple platform.
So while he calls the prez’s remarks “deeply offensive,” Zuck says they don’t violate Facebook’s “incitement to violence” policy."
https://nypost.com/2020/06/04/mark-zuckerberg-stands-up-against-censorship/
What a difference 6 months makes.
@averagejoe1 saidI would love someone's take on this??
Thousand....Thousand.... You think Twitter banning is OK.
The liberal colleges take great glee in telling conservative speakers to get the hell off of our campuses with all their conservative ideas. If you think Twitter deal is cool, it follows that you think this college action is cool. Right???
So square this up for us. Do you think it is OK for an institut ...[text shortened]... fferent viewpoints than do the faculty? Thousand??? You gonna give us a straight answer on this?
@metal-brain saidAre you suggesting that the Parler ban by app stores has been orchestrated by its commercial opposition. Because the host app sites that have banned it do not own social media platforms
Big Tech is in violation of the Sherman Act.
Why hasn't Trump acted on that?
They are overtly excluding competition.
That is clearly illegal!
There are plenty of examples of Apple and GOOGLE attempting to monopolise their particular market niches but this simply isn’t one of them.
I do not agree with them barring access to this platform though, it’s a different order of censorship from the Facebook and Twitter bans on Trump
@kevcvs57 saidHere is an excerpt from the link below:
Are you suggesting that the Parler ban by app stores has been orchestrated by its commercial opposition. Because the host app sites that have banned it do not own social media platforms
There are plenty of examples of Apple and GOOGLE attempting to monopolise their particular market niches but this simply isn’t one of them.
I do not agree with them barring access to this platform though, it’s a different order of censorship from the Facebook and Twitter bans on Trump
"Parler CEO John Matze said on Fox’s “Sunday Morning Futures” that he believed Apple, Google, and Amazon colluded “to make sure that at the same time we would lose access to not only our apps, but they’re shutting all of our servers off tonight, off the Internet.” The Parler website was unavailable on Jan. 11.
The Department of Justice, Apple, and Google didn’t respond to requests for comment.
An Amazon spokeswoman said Amazon did not coordinate with Apple or Google. She pointed to the letter Amazon Web Services (AWS) sent to Parler, in which it said “we’ve seen a steady increase in this violent content on your website, all of which violates our terms.”
https://www.theepochtimes.com/rep-nunes-calls-for-racketeering-investigation-into-big-tech-companies-following-parler-ban_3650863.html?utm_source=newsnoe&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=breaking-2021-01-10-2
Big Tech is responsible for their own content, not that of others. They want it both ways.
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/section-230-defense-bill-ndaa-big-tech/2020/12/02/id/999610/
I suggest you read "Section 230" and the "Sherman Act". After you do that you will understand things better.
Parler, a social network used to plan the storming of the U.S. Capitol last week, has been hit by a massive data scrape. Security researchers collected swaths of user data before the network went dark Monday morning after Amazon, Google, and Apple booted the platform.
https://cybernews.com/news/70tb-of-parler-users-messages-videos-and-posts-leaked-by-security-researchers/
I suspected as much.
@metal-brain saidI suggest you and Parler find some proof that these entities colluded rather than reacting simultaneously to the same events / actions by Trump.
Here is an excerpt from the link below:
"Parler CEO John Matze said on Fox’s “Sunday Morning Futures” that he believed Apple, Google, and Amazon colluded “to make sure that at the same time we would lose access to not only our apps, but they’re shutting all of our servers off tonight, off the Internet.” The Parler website was unavailable on Jan. 11.
The Department o ...[text shortened]... t you read "Section 230" and the "Sherman Act". After you do that you will understand things better.
You love proof MB should be a cinch mate, good luck though.
As I’ve said I’m not sure that the taking down of an entire platform is the best way to deal with this. It’s maybe not a bad idea to corral these fuds onto one platform where the authorities can check on their latest BS lies.
@philokalia saidI tried gab first because the others were to slow to sign up. I couldn't get the preview that other social media sites have. I wasn't impressed by that.
I think Gab is the best.
However, their servers are getting a bit overpowered today, with big guys like PeterSweden jumping on over.
But they run their own servers, and they receive the bulk of their pay through cryptocurrency. They have a very bright future.