Hacker News Reader

Comment by rendall | Hacker News Reader

I didn't say anything about "forcing Amazon to do business" with me. If that's your solution, it's a non-starter.

I don't have a solution, but Amazon + Apple + Google coordinating to shut down a platform for communication - even a platform that contains expression that I strongly disagree with, I might add - is a problem that requires a solution

This is what I wish more people understood now rather than later, but at some point everyone will understand that it's a problem

View on HN

If you come up with a good solution, let us know. Until then, I’m happy to support antitrust action against apple/google/amazon/facebook - but for more pressing reasons than the deplatforming of fascists attempting to overthrow a fair and free election.

> more pressing reasons than the deplatforming of fascists

Hint: it's the identical problem to deplatforming BLM or Antifa or Occupy or the Proud Boys or pick anyone you agree with that annoys powerful people. "Having the better politics" will not protect you. "Oh they're just fascists" will not protect your peoples.

Except you need to replace “annoys powerful people” with “storms the seat of our government with intent to overthrow a democratic election result” I’m fine with that being the line for companies to ban a political entity. Amazon and google aren’t randomly banning BLM for protesting in cities.

But they have been doing that since forever and nobody was complaining. Here's a link to when twitter deleted 125,000 ISIS accounts [1] (and they had been monitoring for islam extremist content for much longer already). So I ask why this uproar now that they are deplatforming fascists?

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/05/twitter-d...

I suspect the difference is more about deplatforming americans than any political view.

Essential Utilities are governed in many places by Universal Service Directives ensuring private companies can not willy nilly choose to deny them as they see fit for commercial or other reasons.

I am familiar with that concept. Good luck arguing that aws, google play, or the app store is an essential utility.

Not all that far from it, though, are they?

Personally I'm fine with Google and Amazon doing this. AWS isnt the only web host and you can sideload apps on Android.

Apple on the other hand is a lot more murky due to their lockdown of app installs. I don't believe they should be made to host things they don't agree with but people should not be prevented form installing whatever software they want on their own hardware.

For the record I am a staunch free speech advocate but fully believe that no-one (no-company either) owes you (the royal you) a place to use your free speech on their property.

> I don't have a solution, but Amazon + Apple + Google coordinating to shut down a platform for communication - even a platform that contains expression that I strongly disagree with, I might add - is a problem that requires a solution

Did they actually coordinate [1] or just come to similar conclusions based on similar facts, in the context of the same cultural zeitgeist?

[1] e.g. Bezos, Cook, and Pichai (or subordinates) on a conference call, deciding what to do

I wouldn't describe it as coordination, but I think it's relatively safe to assume that at the very least whichever companies were slowest to react would have had their decision influenced by the earlier actions of other large companies. So there probably is somewhat of a snowball effect there.

Isn’t the solution to avoid cloud computing, stack overflow style?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com