He makes an interesting point distinguishing Twitter's right to censor to AWS dropping Parler.<p>> Apple, Google, AWS are much more like "common infrastructure providers" than a social media site is.<p>I think there's a further distinction between AWS and Apple/Google. Apple and Google (in the Parler context) are essentially publishers of a sort: they publish apps. I don't see a meaningful difference between publishing tweets and applications.<p>However, the AWS activity seems troublesome. Would it be OK if AWS pulled the plug on you if you criticized Bezos or consumerism or big tech in general? The line between AWS and your public utility is not that far. The line between AWS and "net neutrality" isn't that far either.
What I think is that we now have some de facto tech organizations taking part of the role of international government.<p>In my mind, international government actually is necessary. But I don't think it is actually going to work as a traditional government and I don't think it's going to work as a set of de facto tech organizations that the governments fight with.<p>What I think can possibly work is one of Buterin's suggestions: decentralized protocols.<p>I actually believe that a path for global security, sustainability, and sanity is a "world government" that we evolve through shared decentralized protocols. And that governance including information distribution regulation, to be effective, will need to be tied into money in the form of sophisticated cryptocurrency.<p>I'm not saying this is easy. Traditionally government has been incredibly bad. But leaving things to private technopolies is just not a solution that can work out for the public good. And it definitely isn't going to integrate with any sort of democratic or other governmental model.<p>I think the starting point needs to be something like package registries. So the government is just providing a metaframework for sharing protocols and certain guidelines or constraints.
Otherwisee it is too hard to evolve and people get stuck with old ineffective protocols.
AWS has had an Acceptable Use Policy since launch. Every hosting service has one. I regularly cite these to take down spammers. <a href="https://aws.amazon.com/aup" rel="nofollow">https://aws.amazon.com/aup</a>
> Parler has a right to exist, full stop.<p>Pretty much sums up technology elite's thoughts on the right to do whatever they want, whenever they want.
People saying parler has a right to exist should be asked if they feel aws, Apple and google should also be forced to host an ISI chat forum. Or if they only support terrorists seeking to overthrow the democratically elected government when it suits their personal politics.<p>Either they support de platforming terrorists, or they have to afford these companies the same level of selectivity they are themselves displaying. In either case you have to allow these hosting providers to say “no way, we aren’t touching this”.