5 ms·
Well, they kind of shot themselves in the foot by leaving big social media platforms... for a big server hosting platform. If they wanted to go Henry David Thor
by lainga 8y ago
Well, they kind of shot themselves in the foot by leaving big social media platforms... for a big server hosting platform. If they wanted to go Henry David Thoreau on the corporate internet, why didn't they buy physical equipment?
- SteveNuts 8y agoNo matter where they end up hosting they'll most likely be breaking some ToS of either their colo or ISP.
- Someguywhatever 8y agoIt's ToS violations all the way down
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- awakeasleep 8y agoIn your scenario, are the datacenters and ISPs immune to political pressure?
- dragonwriter 8y agoWell, if we had net neutrality, the ISPs would be legally mandated to be content neutral; you can, of course, run your own data center. EDIT: It may not be cheap, but the “free” in free press is libre, not gratis.
- lainga 8y agoMaybe not, but there are a much more diverse set of ISPs in different countries than there are cloud-hosting providers. We know that some of them are looser with what they will or won't enforce as long as you keep paying them. Can you imagine all those spammers from Bulgarian ISPs hosting their C&C servers on Azure? I'm not saying there's a bulletproof-safe way for Gab, or any other site for that matter, to host - what if Trump slips Comcast $20 and a caramel tomorrow and tells them to bucket CNN traffic? - but there are certain choices which are obviously more risky than others.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]