171–180 of 366 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://bionumbers.hms.harvard.edu/bionumber.aspx?s=y&id=100... 100-400ms. Close enough.
400ms must be when you're 5 minutes from falling asleep. Cloudflare said 300-400ms when it's really 100-400ms, effectively lying by 3x. It's not material to their business but still disgusting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I could be wrong here but my understanding is that the letter forms of a font are not subject to copyright, only the font file itself. This is why Microsoft was able to create Arial which is a virtual clone of Helvetica without it being a derivative work.
you mean I could copy a font as long as the resulting font file is different from the original one?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What the heck happened to their OpEx in 2018?! They went from growing at 60% YoY in 2017 with an 8% Operating Loss, to growing 43% YoY with an Operating Loss of 44%. To put it another way, in 2018 they grew their revenue 40% (+$58m) and grew expenses 100% (+$115m). I mean, apparently they raised a huge round and felt the need to increase spending massively. And then saw slowing growth as a response? Was there a massi…
My guess: new development-intensive products like the 1.1.1 DNS, Wireguard, WAF etc plus general scaling and growth on one side, and increased competition from established cloud services on the other. After all, if you are already on eg AWS, just using Cloudfront is temptingly easy. (even if bad from a redundancy perspective)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why would the public have a chance to see the financial status of a privately held company? alternatively, would you like to share your financial status with the rest of us?
I don’t want to post my own company since it can be traced to me IRL, but yeah, all tax returns are public in Sweden, personal and companies alike. Here is Spotify’s financials from its inception to today: https://www.allabolag.se/5567037485/spotify-ab You can find the same data for all companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But tinbucket , I’m pretty sure you just loudly proclaimed you would be happy to pay at least $5/month!
I'd happily pay $5/month if it covered all of my hobby projects. I'm not interesting in paying to run just a single project.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
why would the public have a chance to see the financial status of a privately held company? alternatively, would you like to share your financial status with the rest of us?
Because a large number of people in society have a legitimate interest in the financial position of a company, irrespective of whether it is private or publicly listed. Cloudflare have around 75,000 paying customers (not to mention those on the free tier) who are dependent on their services, and would probably like to know if they’re about to go bust. As would their employees, suppliers, private shareholders, credito…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not just pay a dividend? That's what stocks are supposed to be, shares of ownership in legitimately valuable enterprises with return on investment.
Growth will also give return on investment. I'd rather see Cloudflare invest in growth and R&D than give a dividend. They are nowhere near finished growing.
Cloudflare has excellent offerings in the networking space, their tech stack seems solid. The customer base seems loyal: Once you're a customer, free or paid, there's very little reason to move out. Their revenue has been growing 43% and 59% for past 2 years: The business side of things seem to be kicking along at a good pace. They seemed to have figured out a perfect balance at offering services to freelancers, to s…
I find their sales tactics and pricing strategies aggressive and unfriendly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, from a citizen perspective I agree. C'est la vie. Our governments need to work against this via legislation. It should not be up to Matthew Prince to decide who to block. He has demonstrated his inability to function as censor in a very visible (and frankly embarassing) way.
> He has demonstrated his inability to function as censor in a very visible (and frankly embarassing) way. How? There have been exactly two cases of "censorship", and that is the Daily Stormer and 8chan. One is an utterly vile peddler of antisemitism (literally named after a Nazi paper) and conspiracy theory, and one was linked to at least three terroristic attacks. If it were not white supremacists but Islamists, it…
This is ironic since Cloudflare has famously been under fire because Prince specifically decided against removing ISIS websites from Cloudflare and vehemently defended his decision that Cloudflare should not be censoring anyone.
Prince himself even agrees with the parent comment, and he goes into pretty good detail in his blog post here [1] about why companies like Cloudflare should not be able to make the decision to remove websites, and that it should be left up to governments. I guess he got overruled on that stance when it came to 8chan, though.
1: https://blog.cloudflare.com/why-we-terminated-daily-stormer/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So far the CEO has twice bowed to public pressure and unilaterally removed completely legal websites from the service because he perceived hosting them made Cloudflare's brand look bad. As a publicly traded company the company is now actually accountable (rather than just in his head) to a slice of public opinion and to keep the brand as profitable as possible. That means not providing services for anything controver…
As Daily Stormer and 8chan have shown, CloudFlare has very few competitors and seemingly none that don't censor. 8chan jumped ship to BitMitigate when CloudFlare dropped them, and then BitMitigate dumped them when they had their backbone link yanked out from under them. Neither site broke any US laws, but they were both controversial.
In the personal/SMB spaces, you're right. Of course, enterprise remains their cash cow, where they compete with the big boys (akamai, incapsula, etc.).
> Neither site broke any US laws, but they were both controversial.
This is basically why so many are bothered by CloudFlare's decision. Who decides what's controversial? We've seen many examples in the past of normal views being "controversial".