311–320 of 483 posts
> When we told them we were also in talks with Fastly, they suddenly "purged" all our domains Holy shit.
What’s especially shocking is how closely coupled sales and engineering are. Like I get they talk, but for a sales call to end in engineering pulling the plug…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way I read the screenshots of the emails from the articles seemed to suggest that something the authors company was doing was causing issues with IP reputation on CloudFlares range. Them very aggressively highlighting the BYO IP feature and then even suggesting third parties to rent IPs from strikes me as a significant detour from their normal “script” (having dealt with their AU sales team before).
this is exactly what is happening. Cloudflare uses an anycast network, so IPs are shared by default. this customer is damaging Cloudflare IP reputation which hurts other customers. Cloudflare can either fire the customer to protect other customers using Cloudflare IPs, or force this customer to use their own IPs and damage/manage their own IP reputation. unfortunately this is expensive and OP is mad they can't do the…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I don't remember them blaming Google for their screw up. You're putting words into my mouth.
I'm not sure what you were expecting people to take away from your message, with the way that it is worded. It may not have been the intent, but the particular way you expressed your point heavily implies it.
My guess would be that they were saying that Cloudflare's HN comment on the incident was to complain about google not cleaning up after the incident.
> the particular way you expressed your point heavily implies it.
You can't turn around the burden of proof this easily. Saying "the particular way you expressed it" doesn't give you license to make things up about a comment that is an inch above yours.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Our experience has been quite the opposite once we were forced to migrate from a free plan (a long time ago after what felt like abusing the free plan due to the amount of bandwidth we were using). The bandwidth caps and all included features were clearly spelled out in the entetprise contract and when we went over, they didn't push for a contract renegotiation unless the overage lasted like 3+ months. And we frequen…
> In fact, recently they asked to renegotiate the contract due to some obsolescence and we ended up significantly dropping the bill as a result. Kind of backfired on them, I wonder if the account manager is kicking herself for this. Only if the cost of supporting the depreciated feature was less than the delta.
The new contract did put limits on some things we didn't have formal limits on before (like number of DNS queries), but aligned with our current usage, so our bill didn't go up.
I've been meaning to probe renegotiating pricing because we've been on this billing tier for probably a decade, and in the end some things we were able to negotiate down, and some rearchitect on the tech side to drop the usage by a staggering amount. We're still working out exactly what that amount is, I have several more weeks before renewal.
However, any reasonably competent person can see that recentralization of the Internet is a Bad Thing™, and that this is precisely what Cloudflare wants.
Likewise, we know that aggregating our data through a for-profit company that's based in the United States means that collected data is reasonably in the hands of the NSA, which makes their DNS-over-HTTPS scheming suspect.
Just like what happened with the company in this post, we have plenty examples of them abusing their position to extract money from both legitimate companies, like this one which is aware of their legal obligations in various countries, and scammers and spammers alike, who Cloudflare are more than happy to host indefinitely in the name of "free speech".
Their lack of clear communication, their broken abuse reporting, their continued claims that they don't "host" all show them to be antagonistic towards anyone negatively impacted by their facilitation of illegal activity.
Cloudflare is an evil company that just happens to be better (but not great) at hiding it than other evil companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> a web forum that facilitates the discussion and harassment of online figures and communities. Their targets are often subject to organized group trolling and stalking, as well as doxxing and real-life harassment.These actions have tied Kiwi Farms to the suicides of three people targeted by members of the forum. Sounds like a pretty abhorrent website
CloudFlare only dropped Kiwi Farms because Keffals made it inconvenient for them to do business with enterprise customers. Said customers were looking at Twitter and saying, "Wait, you host WHAT?!" Before that CF was high and mighty on the "free speech" horse. There's an old spat between CloudFlare and Malwarebytes where MB was threatening to block all of CloudFlare because they wouldn't remove literal malware . The…
But they keep doing it. Just not KiwiFarms but other websites. I've reported it to them, they claim they are only a proxy (that's not true, they are also the registrar and DNS). Nothing was done.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure what you were expecting people to take away from your message, with the way that it is worded. It may not have been the intent, but the particular way you expressed your point heavily implies it.
> I'm not sure what you were expecting people to take away from your message, with the way that it is worded. My guess would be that they were saying that Cloudflare's HN comment on the incident was to complain about google not cleaning up after the incident. > the particular way you expressed your point heavily implies it. You can't turn around the burden of proof this easily. Saying "the particular way you expresse…
>the CEO’s strategy was to turn up here and criticise Google for not deindexing quickly enough
This wording implies that the CEO deflecting on HN was their strategy for responding to this problem, not that the CEO deflected on HN in addition to admitting fault elsewhere. Typically 'strategy' is used to refer everything that they planned to do, not a single action.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>I have spent far too long dealing with this as an RNG supplier Is there much of a market for that? I thought random.org had it all sewn up.
Gaming machines are highly regulated, almost like medical devices. There are seals on the hardware, any modification must be approved, you must certify that the payout is the expected one, ...
Gambling however, you constantly have government auditors and the tax office crawling up your literal arse to make sure you don't cheat the gamblers, or worse, the government out of their money. And in some cases, add the mob or other criminals on top who also want their cut.
Cloudflare is evil, even though they do a decent job of pretending they care. They are smart to offer gateway services (gateway as in gateway drugs - stuff to get you hooked) for free to end users, since it grows their fanboi base, gets more people familiar with their services, and gets people hooked in ways that make it very difficult to use something else when their projects grow. However, any reasonably competent…
It's an inevitable outcome, as long as there is nothing done against the big threat actors: government-run APTs from China, Russia, North Korea and Iran, government-tolerated scammers (India, Turkey), rogue actors in our governments' security services (e.g. Pegasus), ordinary criminals mass-hacking vulnerable devices and selling access to them to be abused for DDoS'ing for less than the cost of a coffee at Starbucks... it's a wild west, and people are hiding themselves behind the largest giants they can find: Cloudflare, Akamai, AWS, Azure and GCP.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>If you're a public company and you go from healthy to mass layoffs within a single quarter then your investors (and employees) should be a lot more concerned. 1. According to the CEO the layoffs in question were for "~40 sales people out of over 1,500 in our go to market org"[1]. Is that really a "mass layoff"? 2. Did you not remember that the layoffs coincided with reversal in macroeconomic conditions? Specifically…
90 days isn't enough time to close enterprise deals. The whole point is that the firings demonstrate that she was never set up to succeed by the organization. That's why the org took heat online for it.
I'm not sure why you think she was fired/assessed on the basis that she wasn't able to close enterprise deals within 90 days. The same tweet seems to refute this by saying "we can often tell within 3 months or less of a sales hire [...] whether they’re going to be successful or not". Presumably they're looking at various indicators (eg. size/composition of the sales pipeline, reviewing her sales calls and/or emails) and using that to predict performance.