Wednesday, February 17, 2021

Statement From the Firm That is Providing Services to Parler to Help It Get Back Online

Parler is back online thanks to California-based SkySilk Cloud Services which is providing Parler with cloud hosting services.

Below is the statement SkySilk CEO Kevin Matossian has issued explaining the firm's decision to host Parler.

Bottom-line, they are simply ok with supporting social media outfits that allow a broad-base of views to be expressed. This is perfectly reasonable from a free-market perspective.

End of story, one hopes.

No doubt the anti-open speech crowd is swarming all over Skysilk Cloud and Matossian online data as part of an attempted search and destroy mission.

This is the world we live in.




  1. While I applaud his apparent courage, notice his references to the First Amendment, which are irrelevant to the problem at hand.

    1. How did you conclude this, sir? What would make his references to the 1A relevant?

    2. The First Amendment only constrains the federal government, not private firms.

      Moreover, one's right to express oneself does not come from the First Amendment; rather, that amendment recognizes a pre-existing right that comes from ownership of one's body.

    3. "The First Amendment only constrains the federal government, not private firms."

      Yep. You can't complain when Jeff Bezos buys all the paper and ink, web hosting services and media conglomerates so that you cannot effectively speak out against him. That's just the free market at work. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps and become the richest person on the planet if you want to be heard.

    4. I wasn't saying that you cannot complain, only that the First Amendment was not intended to provide any protection in this instance.

  2. Nice message from Skysilk Cloud CEO, but their Acceptable Use Policy states:

    "Customers and End Users are solely responsible for content We do not review, edit, censor, or take responsibility for any information customers or End Users may create. Because of this, we cannot, and do not, accept any responsibility from customers, End Users, or third parties, resulting from inaccurate, unsuitable, offensive or illegal content or transactions. We specifically reserve the right to refuse to provide the Service to customers or End Users engaged in the dissemination of material that may cause us to be subject to attacks on our network, or that while technically legal, run counter to our corporate principles. This type of content may include, but is not limited to, racist, pornographic, hateful material or those which create customer service or abuse issues for us."

    This boilerplate appears similar to every other hosting service. Unless Parlar has a different agreement which is possible since it would probably be a significant increase in business to Skysilk. I agree with The Napster that the First Amendment was designed to constrain the federal government not private business. But the federal government's intrusion into private business with subsidies and regulation make this a murky area. Are private businesses really private anymore? In any event, the federal government's repeated violation of the First Amendment as well as the constitution itself makes them useless documents. As RW concludes: "This is the world we live in."

    1. I dont think they are private at all anymore to be honest Brian. Used to be soap box and trusted journalism were completely different animals.

      There is now no such clear delineation. Social nets have made their one size fits all directed data troughs serve as media aggregators that make it easy for the Idiocracy to ignore the genuine work of discernment or source checking.

      Its as the state planned and nets have been compromised into continuing.

      There is no going back and nets that should be public trusts like outlets of old are "allowed" to be private and not be held accountable for their censorship as long as it meets the state needs.

      make no mistake there is NO going back for stupid masses