Earlier quoted context omitted.
Keffals brags about sending hrt to minors without their parent's knowledge.
Quoted post unavailable.
No post body was provided.
Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
431–440 of 1001 posts
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#432Two times in the past we decided to terminate content from our security services because we found it reprehensible. In 2017, we terminated the neo-Nazi troll site The Daily Stormer. And in 2019, we terminated the conspiracy theory forum 8chan. In a deeply troubling response, after both terminations we saw a dramatic increase in authoritarian regimes attempting to have us terminate security services for human rights o…
What this really says that they opened a hole which got them into a questionable legal area by removing them, and they regret not just remaining neutral.
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
And let's be real. DDoS attacks are acts of digital terrorism. They're attacking infrastructure due to political motives. These people who want to revoke DDoS protection for groups they don't like are essentially promoting terrorism. Why else would they fight so hard to remove DDoS protection, if not because they simply want those attacks to succeed?
DDoS is a product of an inherent weakness of the internet infrastructure, namely BGP. Cloudflare "solves" this by acting as a middleman, and charging for their service. I don't know if I would describe a DDoS attack as "digital terrorism", but it is annoying and hard to stop on an individual level because of the design of the internet.
[deleted]
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
True. Let's say KiwiFarms was entirely hosted/located in a shed in the middle of nowhere. Someone walks up to it and sets it on fire. Should the local fire department put it out? Assume it's not going to spread to other buildings/etc.
Is Cloudflare a government service? Do local fire departments remove copyright infringers' sheds?
It's a platform of services like a government service is typically provisioned. While not a democratically elected government, they use governance all the same.
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
Josh Moon (founder) gloating on stream about getting Chloe Segal to kill herself after KF harassed her for 5 years https://twitter.com/keffals/status/1564490554754433025
I don't see him gloating about getting Chloe Segal to kill herself in that tweet or video. What I see is him making fun of her death? Reminds me of a video I saw of a photo of Donald Rumsfeld being burnt when he died last year. What am I missing?
He founded and operates the site and he reacted to her death by calling himself a god. In what way is that not gloating?
If the person burning the Rumsfeld photo contributed to his death then I might say they were gloating too.
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I support ButtFlare here - they should act as a utility, not as an arbiter of content. So then advocate for them to actually be a utility. Right now they get to benefit from being treated like one, but not being held to the same legal standard of an actual utility.
Being a utility doesn't make them any less of a de facto arbiter or any better of a company. Utilities can suck too. And, worse, they do it with the political backing of the state.
Indeed, it doesn't! But having much stricter legal obligations means there are more tools to hold their feet to the fire.
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
Josh Moon (founder) gloating on stream about getting Chloe Segal to kill herself after KF harassed her for 5 years https://twitter.com/keffals/status/1564490554754433025
I don't see him gloating about getting Chloe Segal to kill herself in that tweet or video. What I see is him making fun of her death? Reminds me of a video I saw of a photo of Donald Rumsfeld being burnt when he died last year. What am I missing?
No post body was provided.
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#438Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some users of KiwiFarms may have the agenda of wanting to drive people to commit suicide, you seem to be accusing the website as a whole of a) having an agenda and b) that agenda being to drive people to kill themselves What evidence is there for this? I haven't kept up with the website recently, is Null telling people to harass people to death?
Official statement from KF on Aug 26th: > What I fear more than losing my site, being sued, or dealing with police is living in a world where fat eunuchs can groom little boys into castrating themselves and nobody is allowed to say anything about it. Wow very neutral site with no agenda here
No post body was provided.
Re: Cloudflare's abuse policies and approach
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
That may be your opinion but lots of parents would not agree with it.
Yeah, but not all parents have the best interests of their children at heart. This is generally recognized, and the reason why there is increasing clarification of the boundaries between the rights of parents and the rights of children. It's the reason that forced marriage and child brides have been outlawed in many countries. It's also the reason why child labour and child welfare, and protective services for children exist.
Should someone be providing HRT to children? Generally no. Has the child been prescribed that medication, and the parents are refusing, unable to, or actively preventing the child from getting that medication? Absolutely!
If this was in relation to insulin, antibiotics, or any other generally accepted medical prescription, the individual would be lauded. Because of transphobia and ignorance, sites like kiwifarms are being targetted by a bunch of relentless shitweasels who are hiding behind Freedom of Speech or Freedom of Expression, something which Cloudflare is under absolutely no legal requirement to provide.
I don't want tech companies to become the arbiters of free speech, but I also don't think companies are obligated to provide services to a website owned by a person who gleefully celebrated the suicide of a victim of harassment.
Now that I am not an employee there anymore, one thing I am absolutely thrilled to say is that the Fastly approach with a Good Neighbour policy is awesome, and that alone (among many awesome things over the 5 years I was there) makes it a better company to work for than CloudFlare.