Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 1001 posts

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#81

Post by yanderekko »

pjc50 wrote: post #76
RichardCNormos wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> you can't project violence over the internet You absolutely can, and that's how CloudFlare got into this situation: by posting people's location on the internet they can be made vulnerable to SWATting. > we've shifted away from violence as a means of enforcing social order The intent of KF and similar absolutely is to use violence as a means of enforcing social order, by encouraging stochastic and opportunistic ter…

No post body was provided.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#82

Post by RichardCNormos »

pjc50 wrote: post #76
RichardCNormos wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

> you can't project violence over the internet You absolutely can, and that's how CloudFlare got into this situation: by posting people's location on the internet they can be made vulnerable to SWATting. > we've shifted away from violence as a means of enforcing social order The intent of KF and similar absolutely is to use violence as a means of enforcing social order, by encouraging stochastic and opportunistic ter…

No post body was provided.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#83

Post by yanderekko »

causi wrote: post #56
hammyhavoc wrote: post #3

If this is in response to Kiwi Farms, I would say this is very disappointing. Love CloudFlare, think they are amazingly innovative, huge amount of respect for the people who work there. I see where they're coming from, but I don't see how KF is defensible whilst 8chan et al aren't.

8chan literally had sub boards dedicated to child pornography. Kiwi Farms is where people make fun of other people. They're really not comparable unless you believe "not being made fun of" is a human right.

> They're really not comparable unless you believe "not being made fun of" is a human right.

This is meant to be sarcastic but a lot of people basically do believe this. Most arguments about "stochastic terrorism" would implicitly aim to devalue/censor any sort of speech that "punched down".

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#84

Post by greyface- »

yanderekko wrote: post #81
pjc50 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can't project violence over the internet You absolutely can, and that's how CloudFlare got into this situation: by posting people's location on the internet they can be made vulnerable to SWATting. > we've shifted away from violence as a means of enforcing social order The intent of KF and similar absolutely is to use violence as a means of enforcing social order, by encouraging stochastic and opportunistic ter…

Quoted post unavailable.

The purpose of a system is what it does.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#85

Post by pjc50 »

throwayyy479087 wrote: post #35

Never thought I'd see the Left trying to weaponize corporations to suppress speech they dislike. Reminds me a LOT of Evangelicals in the 2000s - I know that comparison has been made frequently but that's the last group that made a serious censorship push. I wonder how all of this will end? I support CloudFlare here - they should act as a utility, not as an arbiter of content. This ends poorly and one day will bite th…

No post body was provided.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#86

Post by dmix »

bjt2n3904 wrote: post #50

CloudFlare opened Pandora's box. It will never be able to shut it. When private companies become enforcers of public morality, you will quickly find morality is shaped by what is profitable. This is a horrible idea.

As we see with Facebook getting pressured by the FBI to preemptively censor information before evening finding out if it's misinformation or not (or even coming from Russia or not). They were basically trusting the FBI to have people's best interests at heart and letting the details work itself out later.

All of these attempts at moderating the internet always get misused, the scope forever expands, and usually does little IRL to stop ideas from spreading (even the FBI example resulted in a massive Streisand effect, because censorship immediately makes people pay attention).

Trusting billion dollar tech companies with this responsibility should be treated like crazy-talk. Even stuff like transparency on motives, transparency on algorithm changes, processes for challenging it, etc etc, are usually not part of the deal.

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#87

Post by tekla »

sealeck wrote: post #75
superkuh wrote: post #21

I am amazed at how cloudflare has turned around and become a reputable, reliable company re: arbitrary breaches of contract based on the CEO's personal opinions. After he breached contract with the Daily Stormer because of "a bad mood" I was sure it'd just devolve into a no-holds barred censorship-fest. Instead he's managing to hold the line against all of the authoritarians and individuals wanting to rip each other…

It's not actually commendable to host content for white supremacists and transphobes. Free speech may be deserving of protection, but white supremacists using the internet to coordinate real-world activities (such as terrorist attacks) doesn't actually qualify as "free speech" deserving protection against "authoritarians and individuals wanting to rip each other down".

"I support free speech except the things that I don't like"

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#88

Post by [deleted] »

throwayyy479087 wrote: post #35

Never thought I'd see the Left trying to weaponize corporations to suppress speech they dislike. Reminds me a LOT of Evangelicals in the 2000s - I know that comparison has been made frequently but that's the last group that made a serious censorship push. I wonder how all of this will end? I support CloudFlare here - they should act as a utility, not as an arbiter of content. This ends poorly and one day will bite th…

[deleted]

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#89

Post by wahnfrieden »

Borgz wrote: post #79

It's rather disappointing that Cloudflare's policy is to not host content that is "illegal, harmful, or violates the rights of others, including content that discloses sensitive personal information, incites or exploits violence against people or animals, or seeks to defraud the public", but they do not apply that same policy to content that they provide DDoS mitigation services for. I don't see why their policies sh…

The policies differ chiefly because of massive difference in revenue

Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach

#90

Post by pjc50 »

RichardCNormos wrote: post #82
pjc50 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you can't project violence over the internet You absolutely can, and that's how CloudFlare got into this situation: by posting people's location on the internet they can be made vulnerable to SWATting. > we've shifted away from violence as a means of enforcing social order The intent of KF and similar absolutely is to use violence as a means of enforcing social order, by encouraging stochastic and opportunistic ter…

Quoted post unavailable.

https://smallwarsjournal.com/jrnl/art/buffalo-shooter-stocha...
Post reply on HN