4 ms·

I use Cloudflare and life is wonderful. This is a good writeup of a cool strategy and while I understand the fears of my fellow posters - and point out the fear

by vr46 9y ago

I use Cloudflare and life is wonderful. This is a good writeup of a cool strategy and while I understand the fears of my fellow posters - and point out the fear-mongering too - we could just take them at their word and see this as a positive step in the fight against evil. The Daily Stormer army deserves little sympathy, and using them to invoke a slippery slope argument full of straw men is somewhat sloppy and escalates this discussion to a place where criminal actors are victims and a company trying to do something good is told they're lackeys of a police state. Geez, cut them some slack.

jacquesm 9y ago
It's not that simple. When you're a party claiming to be a transparent pass-through then you should be just that. As soon as you start tampering with the signal on some of the connections you lose trust for all of the connections. After all, you shouldn't even have that capability to begin with.
- matt4077 9y ago
  You're just restating the basic slippery slope argument.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    I wasn't. See also: common carriers and the protections and expectations that go with that.
  - saurik 9y ago
    Again: this is not "slippery slope" as Cloudflare is already at the bottom of the slope. I will implore you, as well, to actually pay attention to the facts of the situation--one that includes an active case playing out right now in court--as opposed to trying to knee-jerk your way to a victory by playing Internet argument fallacy cards. I realize that you are probably very used to people making this argument just assuming the conclusion: I do not in general (and have been going around giving talks about the failure of centralization from the perspective of "let's be very careful to not theorize and only look at concrete situations that have already come to pass") and have not done that here either (instead, I showed why this scenario is the same as the one being played out with the same actor--Cloudflare--for which we already know the conclusion: they are in court, right now, getting beaten up over blocking a site and are furiously backpedaling).
  - sametmax 9y ago
    I don't see why the slipery slope argument is to be rejected. If you walk on the edge of a cliff, it's a good thing to realize falling is part of the risk.
saurik 9y ago
> The Daily Stormer army deserves little sympathy, and using them to invoke a slippery slope argument full of straw men is somewhat sloppy and escalates this discussion to a place where criminal actors are victims and a company trying to do something good is told they're lackeys of a police state. I agree that The Daily Stormer deserves no sympathy, and will note I did not apologize for them (I even chose to call them "Nazis" instead of "neo-Nazis" or "alt-right": let's call a spade a spade, after all). However, I also did not make a theoretical argument to which you can try to play your dismissive cards of "slippery slope" or "straw man": in fact, I pointed to an ongoing case playing out right now, in court. https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/10/11/cloudflare-ceo-neo-nazi-piracy/ https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/10/11/cloudflare-ceo-n... > If Cloudflare Can Block Neo-Nazi Sites, Why Can’t They Block Piracy Sites? > In a recent filing, lawyers for the adult entertainment company demanded a 7-hour deposition. Using Prince’s own words against him, ALS Scan wrote, > “By his own admissions, Mr. Prince’s decision to terminate certain users’ accounts was ‘arbitrary,’ the result of him waking up ‘in a bad mood,’ and a decision he made unilaterally as ‘CEO of a major Internet infrastructure corporation’. > “Mr. Prince has made it clear that he is the one who determines the circumstances under which Cloudflare will terminate a user’s account.” The reality is exactly as I claim it to be, and the stakes are just as high as I argue. If you disagree, I implore you to respond to the evidence, not simply dismiss the argument out of hand.
- vr46 9y ago
  Fair enough. Clumsy handling by Mr Prince - and certainly suggests that we need more due process everywhere - but an emotive issue that most people could sympathize with. The company has basically decided that Nazis don't get service but porn-pirates do. It's not very black and white, though. Morally, it's a minefield. "Porn producers pissed-off at pirates not being given the same treatment as Nazis" I bow to your observations, but I'm not convinced that the stakes are as high as you argue...
shrimp_emoji 9y ago
>a company trying to do something good Limit free speech to score brownie points? "Good" and "evil" are subjective and mutable, and that's why defending free speech is a good idea -- it's the best process we have to arrive at better definitions of those things. For example, letting even Nazis have their own site gives everyone rational a glimpse into how "evil" and bankrupt their ideology truly is. Banning them from all platforms, on the other hand, makes them dangerous and mystical, robbing us of data.

by vr46 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

It's not that simple. When you're a party claiming to be a transparent pass-through then you should be just that. As soon as you start tampering with the signal on some of the connections you lose trust for all of the connections. After all, you shouldn't even have that capability to begin with.

matt4077 9y ago
You're just restating the basic slippery slope argument.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  I wasn't. See also: common carriers and the protections and expectations that go with that.
- saurik 9y ago
  Again: this is not "slippery slope" as Cloudflare is already at the bottom of the slope. I will implore you, as well, to actually pay attention to the facts of the situation--one that includes an active case playing out right now in court--as opposed to trying to knee-jerk your way to a victory by playing Internet argument fallacy cards. I realize that you are probably very used to people making this argument just assuming the conclusion: I do not in general (and have been going around giving talks about the failure of centralization from the perspective of "let's be very careful to not theorize and only look at concrete situations that have already come to pass") and have not done that here either (instead, I showed why this scenario is the same as the one being played out with the same actor--Cloudflare--for which we already know the conclusion: they are in court, right now, getting beaten up over blocking a site and are furiously backpedaling).
- sametmax 9y ago
  I don't see why the slipery slope argument is to be rejected. If you walk on the edge of a cliff, it's a good thing to realize falling is part of the risk.

saurik 9y ago

> The Daily Stormer army deserves little sympathy, and using them to invoke a slippery slope argument full of straw men is somewhat sloppy and escalates this discussion to a place where criminal actors are victims and a company trying to do something good is told they're lackeys of a police state. I agree that The Daily Stormer deserves no sympathy, and will note I did not apologize for them (I even chose to call them "Nazis" instead of "neo-Nazis" or "alt-right": let's call a spade a spade, after all). However, I also did not make a theoretical argument to which you can try to play your dismissive cards of "slippery slope" or "straw man": in fact, I pointed to an ongoing case playing out right now, in court. https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/10/11/cloudflare-ceo-neo-nazi-piracy/ https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2017/10/11/cloudflare-ceo-n... > If Cloudflare Can Block Neo-Nazi Sites, Why Can’t They Block Piracy Sites? > In a recent filing, lawyers for the adult entertainment company demanded a 7-hour deposition. Using Prince’s own words against him, ALS Scan wrote, > “By his own admissions, Mr. Prince’s decision to terminate certain users’ accounts was ‘arbitrary,’ the result of him waking up ‘in a bad mood,’ and a decision he made unilaterally as ‘CEO of a major Internet infrastructure corporation’. > “Mr. Prince has made it clear that he is the one who determines the circumstances under which Cloudflare will terminate a user’s account.” The reality is exactly as I claim it to be, and the stakes are just as high as I argue. If you disagree, I implore you to respond to the evidence, not simply dismiss the argument out of hand.

vr46 9y ago
Fair enough. Clumsy handling by Mr Prince - and certainly suggests that we need more due process everywhere - but an emotive issue that most people could sympathize with. The company has basically decided that Nazis don't get service but porn-pirates do. It's not very black and white, though. Morally, it's a minefield. "Porn producers pissed-off at pirates not being given the same treatment as Nazis" I bow to your observations, but I'm not convinced that the stakes are as high as you argue...

shrimp_emoji 9y ago

>a company trying to do something good Limit free speech to score brownie points? "Good" and "evil" are subjective and mutable, and that's why defending free speech is a good idea -- it's the best process we have to arrive at better definitions of those things. For example, letting even Nazis have their own site gives everyone rational a glimpse into how "evil" and bankrupt their ideology truly is. Banning them from all platforms, on the other hand, makes them dangerous and mystical, robbing us of data.