Remember when we used to believe that "the internet interprets censorship as damage and routes around it?"
Terminating Service for 8Chan
841–850 of 1001 posts
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#842Right, suddenly CF cares about 'law'.
Scam (lots of phishing and fake webshops), spam, piracy, illegal pornography, it's all chilling on CF's network en masse. When they get notified about this, do you think they terminate that client? No, they will just come up with some dogmatic story [1] and ignore every call to action/cooperation.
"we are rebuilding the Internet, and we don't believe that we or anyone else should have the right to tell people what content they can and cannot publish online."
Yes, ladies and gentleman, he said it. In 2012 Mr Prince was trying to build a proprietary internet. These days he would never say that again. I mean, it's just laughable that you feel zero responsibility over your clients. Hence they publicly deny this now of course.
CloudFlare: it would be great if you start actively participating in abuse prevention, instead of behaving like an offshore/bulletproof provider behind red 'n blue curtains.
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#843Earlier quoted context omitted.
People of color, and LGBT are demographics. White supremacy is an ideology (a reprehensible one at that). People choose their ideology, not their race, or sexuality. They are not the same thing. Third party businesses should not feel any obligation to do business with "dudes who blabber" about the murdering and hate of others.
People choose their religion, too.
Religious groups have a loooooong history of persecution, discrimination, and genocide.
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#844So much hypocrisy. When war mongering governments like US, Russia use Cloudflare for war propaganda websites that enable their wars and killings of lots and lots of people it doesn't bother Matthew Prince. Or when websites behind Cloudflare promote and sell lethal weapons that are the actual reason behind mass shootings even being possible, still doesn't bother him. But no, a dissident free speech activist website is…
this should be the top comment
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#845I don't like 8chan as a website, but I'm still not a fan of this move. Feels like no one online wants to just provide a 'dumb pipe', and always want to act like a pseudo publisher trying to dictate what's allowed and what isn't. Imagine if real life utilities did this. If because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply, or the electricity company refused to provid…
I understand the point you are making. However lets take a look at the following:
Cloudflare is U.S. corporation providing services to other people and companies. You have to be a member in order to use their services, so you are tied to their terms. This basically a "private" club you are joining
Cloudflare is not beholden to uphold the Constitution of the USA. They are beholden to their shareholders and the laws of the USA in order to operate as a Corporation.
Cloudflare can do what ever it wants. People and Companies do not have to use cloudflare. Boycott them, do not recommend them ever.
Now if the USA had some kind of non-profit, Nationwide Municipal ISP (fibre), for instance, the US Public Library system could be a good choice. They could offer some basic services and at the same time be the location that would protect speech/text (based on the Constitution). It's not perfect, but it's something to consider & you wouldn't be kicked off because somebody doesn't like what you are saying/producing.
Or there should be a law in the USA, stating that companies doing business in the USA cannot refuse service if they find the clients content to be offense and protected under the Constitution of the USA
Peace
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#846I don't like 8chan as a website, but I'm still not a fan of this move. Feels like no one online wants to just provide a 'dumb pipe', and always want to act like a pseudo publisher trying to dictate what's allowed and what isn't. Imagine if real life utilities did this. If because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply, or the electricity company refused to provid…
It seems like having a known honeypot to capture conversations of would be evil doers would be much better than to further force them underground into the likes of Tor. Who is going to be able to mine conversations for advanced warnings once they are there? Also, the silencing of dissidents seems like the wrong move in general for all internet companies. The truth can tolerate being harassed, bashed and unliked. What…
Yeah, the cloudflare blog didn't make much sense. At one point it basically talks about how great it is that it got advanced warning that could potentially be acted on, then pretty much says, "oh, but we don't want to know ahead of time next time".
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#847I'd rather companies did this, than governments.
Like how some companies won't service porn-related ventures.
It's fine if a company doesn't want to make their money doing this, but it shouldn't just be, "Oh something bad happened... time to react..." They should take philosophic stances, "I don't want to help with un-moderated user content. Show me your moderation policy and plan, and then we can do business..."
What bugs me is that the Cloudflare CEO flip-flopped on this like 8 times. They have no coherent policy, other than, "Don't give us bad press before our IPO." Shitty.
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#848Earlier quoted context omitted.
People of color, and LGBT are demographics. White supremacy is an ideology (a reprehensible one at that). People choose their ideology, not their race, or sexuality. They are not the same thing. Third party businesses should not feel any obligation to do business with "dudes who blabber" about the murdering and hate of others.
What about communists, anarchists, marxists, mormons, people who believe there are genetically based cognitive differences based on sex/race. What about people who are against abortion, against weed legalization, what about people who consider cops to be a civilian death squad used by the rich to oppress the poor. What about people who think the US Army is an occupation force in every place but America. Is OK to disc…
I think it's okay to discriminate or moderate against a set of beliefs if you can show that the spread beliefs lead to the widespread harm of others.
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#849I don't like 8chan as a website, but I'm still not a fan of this move. Feels like no one online wants to just provide a 'dumb pipe', and always want to act like a pseudo publisher trying to dictate what's allowed and what isn't. Imagine if real life utilities did this. If because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply, or the electricity company refused to provid…
I always find the utility comparison an interesting one. If the water supply was poisoned, would you expect the utility company to cut your supply until it could be cleaned? If they could cut it off closer to the source of the poison so you weren't affected, would you prefer that?
You don't expect 1000V from your electricity company. You don't expect arsenic from your water utility. You expect the fcc no-call list to be honored. Very few utilities are truly dumb pipes.
(Not trying to draw the obvious comparison between 8chan & arsenic. Just that I think when we're holding "dumb pipes" up as a holy grail, it'd be worth remembering that the holy grail is a myth.)
Re: Terminating Service for 8Chan
#850I don't like 8chan as a website, but I'm still not a fan of this move. Feels like no one online wants to just provide a 'dumb pipe', and always want to act like a pseudo publisher trying to dictate what's allowed and what isn't. Imagine if real life utilities did this. If because someone used your property for offensive purposes, the water company cut off the water supply, or the electricity company refused to provid…
I think slippery-slope-type arguments are they, themselves a slippery slope. What if nobody ever again acts on their moral courage because they’re afraid of hypothetical bad actors abusing that precedent? Oh My! [clutches pearls] Not everything is relative, you’re not smart or ethical because you can make up hypotheticals to oppose any action. You’re just a nihilist with no grounding in reality and no value system. It’s ok to say something is bad, and then act against that bad thing. /rant
Edit: and when you do fall into that relativist trap, the bad guys win because they don’t care about any of it. They don’t worry about slippery slopes, or unintended consequences. Overthinking and other various mental masturbation by good people let’s bad people win.