6 ms·

This just seems weird given their previous stances, but it’s their network so it’sfine they did it, but they have lost all protections of an ISP and became a cu

This just seems weird given their previous stances, but it’s their network so it’sfine they did it, but they have lost all protections of an ISP and became a curator. I stopped using them, and I can’t pretend that I would’ve contributed anything to their bottom line, but I know my future clients won’t either.

ceejayoz 9y ago
> they have lost all protections of an ISP and became a curator YouTube, Reddit, Facebook, etc. ban people without losing their safe harbor provisions. Not sure why you'd think it's any different in CloudFlare's situation.
- milankragujevic 9y ago
  Maybe not legally but obviously morally at least in my eyes. I think we should protect all content, but I’m not saying it’s illegal for them to drop Stormer.
  - Frondo 9y ago
    Private businesses refusing to do business with Nazis? Great! When did this become a moral gray area?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - Boothroid 9y ago
      The problem is that if the political winds were blowing the other way it could be your favoured group whose beliefs are deemed beyond the pale. We set a dangerous precedent when we outlaw speech we don't like.
      - kbenson 9y ago
        This isn't outlawing. As the GP noted it's a private company. I have no obligation to be part of the platform for a position I don't support. It's not censorship when I don't give my support. It is when I try to exert control over others. It is when the government exerts that control over us all.
        Boothroid 9y ago
        Outlawing, censorship, call it what you like - it's about removing someone's right to communicate. The fact that it's a private company should worry us more.
        kbenson 9y ago
        > it's about removing someone's right to communicate. Exactly. Their rights. No rights were affected here. They were given permission to use cloudfare, and that was revoked. The fact they can still go somewhere else proves that no rights were affected.
        gremlinsinc 9y ago
        Doesn't the ceo / admins of cloudflare have their 'freedom' to choose what goes through their servers? Censorship / Freedom of speech does NOT include companies --it just states the government can't stop free speech (except in some cases like child porn)... but companies aren't the government... stop thinking they are held to the same standard as the constitution.
      - croon 9y ago
        The thing is, if my favoured group specifically revolved around oppression of groups of people (ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, what have you), I would deserve it. This isn't a tough definition. I'm fine with republicans hating "lefties", broncos hating raiders, xbox hating playstation. When hate is directed at non-chosen traits, that's the red line. Am I crazy? I feel like I am with all this defense of literal nazis (flags, signs, salute, speech and all).
  - gremlinsinc 9y ago
    So, if I were a member of isis and demanding death to all infidels..on my website..cloudflare should be cool w/ that?
    - alva 9y ago
      Cloudflare provide their service to ISIS sites
- aw3c2 9y ago
  The sites you mention are not utilitarian services as Cloudflare or a DNS provider or a hoster. I really dislike these events.
  - ceejayoz 9y ago
    Each of them owe their continuing existence to the DMCA's safe harbor provisions.

ceejayoz 9y ago

> they have lost all protections of an ISP and became a curator YouTube, Reddit, Facebook, etc. ban people without losing their safe harbor provisions. Not sure why you'd think it's any different in CloudFlare's situation.

milankragujevic 9y ago
Maybe not legally but obviously morally at least in my eyes. I think we should protect all content, but I’m not saying it’s illegal for them to drop Stormer.
- Frondo 9y ago
  Private businesses refusing to do business with Nazis? Great! When did this become a moral gray area?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - Boothroid 9y ago
    The problem is that if the political winds were blowing the other way it could be your favoured group whose beliefs are deemed beyond the pale. We set a dangerous precedent when we outlaw speech we don't like.
    - kbenson 9y ago
      This isn't outlawing. As the GP noted it's a private company. I have no obligation to be part of the platform for a position I don't support. It's not censorship when I don't give my support. It is when I try to exert control over others. It is when the government exerts that control over us all.
      - Boothroid 9y ago
        Outlawing, censorship, call it what you like - it's about removing someone's right to communicate. The fact that it's a private company should worry us more.
        kbenson 9y ago
        > it's about removing someone's right to communicate. Exactly. Their rights. No rights were affected here. They were given permission to use cloudfare, and that was revoked. The fact they can still go somewhere else proves that no rights were affected.
        gremlinsinc 9y ago
        Doesn't the ceo / admins of cloudflare have their 'freedom' to choose what goes through their servers? Censorship / Freedom of speech does NOT include companies --it just states the government can't stop free speech (except in some cases like child porn)... but companies aren't the government... stop thinking they are held to the same standard as the constitution.
    - croon 9y ago
      The thing is, if my favoured group specifically revolved around oppression of groups of people (ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, what have you), I would deserve it. This isn't a tough definition. I'm fine with republicans hating "lefties", broncos hating raiders, xbox hating playstation. When hate is directed at non-chosen traits, that's the red line. Am I crazy? I feel like I am with all this defense of literal nazis (flags, signs, salute, speech and all).
- gremlinsinc 9y ago
  So, if I were a member of isis and demanding death to all infidels..on my website..cloudflare should be cool w/ that?
  - alva 9y ago
    Cloudflare provide their service to ISIS sites
aw3c2 9y ago
The sites you mention are not utilitarian services as Cloudflare or a DNS provider or a hoster. I really dislike these events.
- ceejayoz 9y ago
  Each of them owe their continuing existence to the DMCA's safe harbor provisions.