31–40 of 40 posts
I don't have much to add about the title except to suggest taking it with a hint of skepticism. Personally, I have a strong affinity for Cloudflare. It has consistently come to my rescue on numerous occasions. I haven't encountered any issues with speed while using their services. It's possible that my fast ISP plays a role, or perhaps the original poster needs to optimize their CF services. However, I believe it's u…
Title seems a bit unfair. Tl;dr: cloudflare is slow due to gov censorship in india
India is blocking a bunch of the IPs. Here's a new acronym for us: "Problem Exists Between User And Internet; PEBUI. This is definitely the next 5 years+ of computing. More and more nations making more and more wild ass decisions about the internet & users ending up disconnected. PEBUI.
It was a completely foreseeable result of a very small minority's war on internet standards. First forcing everyone to use TLS, and then forcing everyone to use stronger forms of TLS that couldn't be inspected. Absolutely no fucks given about the many downsides, no alternatives considered. What did they think countries were gonna do? Just give up governing? Did they really think a web browser was going to defeat an e…
You're proposing we let users "opt" into insecurity. And it doesn't seem like anything user's want: it seems like what governments what to coral their citizens into.
Further, I'm not sure what viable insecure plans we have that make sense; what has been on offer that we ought have considered?
It's just getting messy now, and who knows what's next, but I have a hard time seeing insecurity as going well for governments. I don't think they have the iron will to deny their citizens internet access, which is their only real power.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It could be argued that the title is just plain wrong - this doesn't seem to be a problem with cloudflare as the title would imply, it is an issue caused by the user's ISP and other ISPs in their country blocking certain IP addresses for some reason or another.
I think it's accurate. The first Cloudflare refers to the product, and the second Cloudflare refers to the company. Ultimately if Cloudflare's customers see slow performance, it doesn't really matter who is to blame. The customers just have a bad experience.
India is blocking a bunch of the IPs. Here's a new acronym for us: "Problem Exists Between User And Internet; PEBUI. This is definitely the next 5 years+ of computing. More and more nations making more and more wild ass decisions about the internet & users ending up disconnected. PEBUI.
It was a completely foreseeable result of a very small minority's war on internet standards. First forcing everyone to use TLS, and then forcing everyone to use stronger forms of TLS that couldn't be inspected. Absolutely no fucks given about the many downsides, no alternatives considered. What did they think countries were gonna do? Just give up governing? Did they really think a web browser was going to defeat an e…
“Cloudflare is slow [in India] and Cloudflare [probably] can’t do much about it [but I don’t know because I’m not paying for support]” would be a more accurate title, although it’s far too snarky. “Cloudflare is slow because of an Indian ISP” or “Cloudflare is slow in India and Cloudflare can’t do much about it” would both still be improvements.
Would be the most accurate.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was a completely foreseeable result of a very small minority's war on internet standards. First forcing everyone to use TLS, and then forcing everyone to use stronger forms of TLS that couldn't be inspected. Absolutely no fucks given about the many downsides, no alternatives considered. What did they think countries were gonna do? Just give up governing? Did they really think a web browser was going to defeat an e…
> First forcing everyone to use TLS, and then forcing everyone to use stronger forms of TLS that couldn't be inspected. Absolutely no fucks given about the many downsides, no alternatives considered. Absolutely. Forcing strong TLS is absolutely a good thing. Enforcing privacy is absolutely a good thing. The problem isn't with that decision, but the governments who don't understand that, and thus it is up to the citiz…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> First forcing everyone to use TLS, and then forcing everyone to use stronger forms of TLS that couldn't be inspected. Absolutely no fucks given about the many downsides, no alternatives considered. Absolutely. Forcing strong TLS is absolutely a good thing. Enforcing privacy is absolutely a good thing. The problem isn't with that decision, but the governments who don't understand that, and thus it is up to the citiz…
That's like saying we should just end world hunger. Yeah, we should. But is it gonna happen? No. So giving people food aid is better than just saying all hunger should just disappear.