Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by RIMR 1986 days ago
No. These guys ARE the bad guys. Not "because the media said so". They are objectively the bad guys.

Parler's members are the rejects that couldn't survive on mainstream platforms due to their poor conduct. That userbase just planned and executed an attempt at insurrection against the US government.

The market overwhelmingly has agreed that Parler violated ethical standards egregiously enough that severing business ties is appropriate.

I fail to see the importance of these people's privacy in the wake of recent events. I also fail to have sympathy for people who trusted this hacked-together Twitter clone with their personal information.

Leaking this information sends a clear message: Extremism and violence are intolerable, and every possible means is at our disposal to fight back against it. That includes exposing violent extremists to the light of day.
1 comments
cutitout 1986 days ago
> I fail to see the importance of these people's privacy in the wake of recent events. I also fail to have sympathy for people who trusted this hacked-together Twitter clone with their personal information.

Then I fail to have any sympathy and solidarity with you. You're just another violent extremist in my eyes, and the enemy of my enemy is not my friend by a long shot.

link
TomSwirly 1985 days ago
> You're just another violent extremist in my eyes,

Can you explain how not caring that a bunch of people got their data leaked makes you a "violent extremist"?

link
cutitout 1984 days ago
I responded to someone who didn't even attempt to make the case how all users of Parler are "violent extremists", they just pulled out that broad brush to justify a transgression. That's intellectually so dishonest I see no functional difference between that and what one would criticize extremists for, and I don't see a meaningful difference between "not minding" a breach of someone's rights and committing it, so that's the violent bit.

> He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.

-- Martin Luther King, Jr.

But if you don't mind their use of "violent extremists" apropos nothing, no, I don't particularly "care to" explain myself to you for using the same phrase in response to them -- I just do it because I can. You could simply remove or ignore my re-using that phrase and my point would stand unchanged. Address the core of an argument, don't just play "gotcha" while ignoring the context and the woods for the trees.

link