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

French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

torrentfreak.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 231 posts

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#221

Post by nucleardog »

josephcsible wrote: post #63
hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard this before. Is there a way to reliably detect if this is occurring or case studies of where this has occurred? Edit: I assume dns over https prevents this also, right?

Yes, DoH prevents that, unless the DoH provider is in on it too, which most of the major ones are now, as this article is about.

There are lots of providers that aren’t CloudFlare/Google/etc: https://github.com/curl/curl/wiki/DNS-over-HTTPS#publicly-av...

(There’s lots of smaller providers, but lots operated by governments, ccTLD administrators, and other major organizations)

I only bring this up because the idea that the major providers “are” the internet is the only reason this is a possible and a problem in the first place.

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#222

Post by darby_nine »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #108
darby_nine wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tech has always been part of the establishment, funded by capital trying to solve capital's problems. The only part of tech that really deviates from this is the free software community, which has always been hostile to capital. The blackout day emerged from people, not the industry, and people have changed.

> funded by capital trying to solve capital's problems Is this parody? Should we start against the trade unions and German barbarians next? (The latter to avenge Varus and recapture the Eagles.)

A parody of what? I don't get the joke.

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#223

Post by Copenjin »

callalex wrote: post #192
Copenjin wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respected by who?

Respect might not be the right word, but during their meteoric rise to popularity in the past decade they have consistently shouted “we don’t moderate content, we’re just a dumb pipe, don’t take this up with us take it up with the publisher!” In the past 3 years or so they have repeatedly proven that to be a lie; they weren’t able to have their cake and eat it too. But their old reputation still sticks around amongst…

> In the past 3 years or so they have repeatedly proven that to be a lie; they weren’t able to have their cake and eat it too.

Yeah, this is what I was referring to, not sure about the reputation but they are still popular, that's for sure.

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#224

Post by aniviacat »

account42 wrote: post #213
aniviacat wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon Musk never passed a law. The representatives chosen by the voters did. These representatives do not magically enter the government; they are selected by the voters. The voters freely decide wether they wish to have representatives who pass laws which are benefitial to Elon Musk.

> they are selected by the voters From a small in-group of well connected people. > The voters freely decide wether they wish to have representatives who pass laws which are benefitial to Elon Musk. No, the voters at best select a bundle of stances for/against various things. Effectively this means you have no input except for maybe one or two issues you care most about. In practice you do not even get to do that as…

> From a small in-group of well connected people.

You are free to run as a candidate, even if you are not a well-connected person. (But of course, the voters will choose to not vote for you.)

> Effectively this means you have no input except for maybe one or two issues you care most about.

You are free to vote for someone who fully represents your opinions (yourself). But noone else will vote for that person. Democracy is about making compromises; the government is an average of people's opinions.

> In practice you do not even get to do that as your representatives are not bound to what they promised to get you to elect them.

This is true. But if a candidate lies to you, you can vote for a different candidate in the next election. Repeatedly reelecting liars is a choice voters make voluntarily.

The reason for bad laws is not that democracy doesn't work. The reason is that democracy does work, and other people keep having the wrong opinions ;)

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#226

Post by anymouse123456 »

michaelcampbell wrote: post #215
anymouse123456 wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same concern here. Also, the phrasing in both, but especially the HN title made me think Cloudflare chose to do something, but it turns out the French court is forcing all of them.

It's almost as if the headline isn't the whole story.

It's almost like that, but more like the headline was misleading.

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#227

Post by Anamon »

collaborative wrote: post #203

Theft is theft, don't matter if it's irl or online. As a developer who periodically witnesses users spending hours trying to circumvent 1 dollar payments I think that the time has come for the piracy culture to end. And I used to do piracy too

Copyright infringement is not theft -- false comparison.

Also, have you considered how likely the people who are trying to get around your payment would be to pay up if they didn't find a way? If what you say about how long they try is true, I'd say the chance is extremely close to 0%.

That's the dirty secret of the anti-piracy campaigns of rightsholders. The "lost sales" narrative is a load of made-up horseradish, and they know it.

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#228

Post by TZubiri »

csomar wrote: post #202
TZubiri wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are comparing genocide with blocking pirating websites, I'm out

It’s a slippery slope. Once you start losing rights, how low can you go? Historically, governments will go very low. A bad election (which is a real risk now in France) and there you have a facist state.

I understand, I was being a bit too punishing.

That said genocide is categorically different than blocking websites. Slippery slope is well regarded as a fallacy.

I did mention that states can choose to go to war though. It is within reasonable realm that the US may overturn the orders of a French court when operating in their country, but it is an act of war. It is something you would do to prevent genocide, but not to allow frenchies to watch sports without paying.

Re: French court orders Google, Cloudflare, Cisco to poison DNS to stop piracy

#230

Post by sealeck »

TZubiri wrote: post #180
sealeck wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is literally just a framing issue. Note first that people generally believe in universal human rights, e.g. states shouldn't be allowed to do horrible things (e.g. genocide) just because they would be asserting their national rights. Further the action of a single state often influences other states, as is especially true when it comes to the internet which is global by nature.

If you are comparing genocide with blocking pirating websites, I'm out

The example is there to establish the principle – once you accept that sovereignty has limitations it's then just a question of which limitations you think are legitimate and which aren't. I think censoring pirate websites kind of isn't.
Post reply on HN