More proof Trumpsexuals are traitors: Parler is back up on a Russian server

Primavera said:
Oh dear, the network connectivity is there but they are setting up the servers including the databases. Should be up and running by the end of the month.
Click to expand...
not if they dont get support services.
Advertising revenue or whatever.
Im not a tekkie -but you cn imagine there are so many ways to shut down the platform by denying support services
 
Jerome said:
You bitches are hilarious. There is democratic socialism (state-subsidized university education, single-payer health care, tc.) happening in LITERALLY EVERY FIRST-WORLD DEMOCRACY ON EARTH.

...except for the U.S.

And what example do you call out? LOL, Cuba and Venezuela. That's authoritarianism, not democratic socialism.
Click to expand...
you spend way too much time trying to clarify definitions while not understanding the dynamics

Socialism is heavily regulated government control of the economy -that's as basic a definition as possible.

It is the government control of large sectors of the economy - not jut by law but by taxation as well -
that destroys economies. Venezuela is very pertinent -as it was a thriving state before socialism

University and HC are only 2 sectors. Health care is fine as single pay,
but shitty delivery when it's gonna be for evermore caravans of illegals as well as the aging population

you guys dont think these thing out -you just want it so
 
CASPER said:
Because those that own the servers have access to everything on the site, think about it. Plus it makes it real easy for them to put their own bots on there and lead the discussions down specific paths.
Besides that, the site is guaranteed to being monitored by US Federal agencies looking for those planning anything beyond just talking. I would Highly suggest staying as far away from it as you can.
Click to expand...




but follow me for a second here.... if everything on the site is public and free speech driven, what would they steal?


I never had a parler account, I don't do social media much at all.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
Parler will be an absolute gold mine for the Russians. Not only does it serve to keep the political division alive in the U.S., the site itself is ripe with personal info just waiting to be plucked. Then there's the delicious possibility of blackmail! Let's see, who's a good example of stupid-shit-you-shouldn't-say-publicly on JPP? Stone? STY?

Stone to random JPP LWer: "We're going to get rid of that usurper Biden for good and get Trump back. We have plans. I'm in this group, we got more guns than liberals can guess. We got guys on the inside who are going with us. Blah blah blah." Just think what a Russian operative could do with *that*! (Caveat: Stone didn't say that, obviously. He has no idea what "usurper" even means. :laugh: )
Click to expand...




Of course you and your ilk will continue to behave like assholes to the other tribe, and blame any division on them or russia.
 
Jerome said:
Yet another dumbass who doesn't understand "free speech."

Private web servers and platforms don't need to put up with ANYTHING, much less violence and insurrection incitement.
Click to expand...





Well it's not that simple, Amazon gets insane tax breaks pays almost no taxes, gets all sorts of tax breaks from local governments and is a monopoly that crushes it's competition.


Twitter sits on this platform and also gets tax breaks and subsidies.... AWS allows twitter users calls for violence, but banned the competition parler the same time. thats not good.


They run on a network that included government ownership. and take much corporate welfare, therefore they are far less a "private company" than your local ace hardware .



So, one starts to ask, if a government
 
Jerome said:
No. It's not unclear in the least.
Click to expand...

The Founding Fathers America was strict on Corporations.

It is unlikely they would have supported corporations over the 1st amendment.

https://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-history-corporations-us/

Our Hidden History of Corporations in the United States
When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country’s founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.

Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end. The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these*:

Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.
For 100 years after the American Revolution, legislators maintained tight control of the corporate chartering process. Because of widespread public opposition, early legislators granted very few corporate charters, and only after debate. Citizens governed corporations by detailing operating conditions not just in charters but also in state constitutions and state laws. Incorporated businesses were prohibited from taking any action that legislators did not specifically allow.
 
dukkha said:
you spend way too much time trying to clarify definitions while not understanding the dynamics

Socialism is heavily regulated government control of the economy -that's as basic a definition as possible.

It is the government control of large sectors of the economy - not jut by law but by taxation as well -
that destroys economies. Venezuela is very pertinent -as it was a thriving state before socialism

University and HC are only 2 sectors. Health care is fine as single pay,
but shitty delivery when it's gonna be for evermore caravans of illegals as well as the aging population

you guys dont think these thing out -you just want it so
Click to expand...

You're in way over your head. You don't know what you're talking about, you're typing too fast and making mistakes, and you're just repeating "Venezuela! Venezuela! Venezuela!" over and over, hoping it makes your point for you.

It won't.
 
Jerome said:
You're in way over your head. You don't know what you're talking about, you're typing too fast and making mistakes, and you're just repeating "Venezuela! Venezuela! Venezuela!" over and over, hoping it makes your point for you.

It won't.
Click to expand...
sure dude.
you can't answer or debate so you rant. Typical dumb ass Progressive
 
RomanDmowski said:
The Founding Fathers America was strict on Corporations.

It is unlikely they would have supported corporations over the 1st amendment.

https://reclaimdemocracy.org/corporate-accountability-history-corporations-us/

Our Hidden History of Corporations in the United States
When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country’s founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.

Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end. The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these*:

Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.
For 100 years after the American Revolution, legislators maintained tight control of the corporate chartering process. Because of widespread public opposition, early legislators granted very few corporate charters, and only after debate. Citizens governed corporations by detailing operating conditions not just in charters but also in state constitutions and state laws. Incorporated businesses were prohibited from taking any action that legislators did not specifically allow.
Click to expand...

The Founding Fathers are dead, and Supreme Court precedent makes very clear you're wrong.

You really wasted a lot of keystrokes there, fatty. Need a snack?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top