15 ms·

Before you register your domain with Cloudflare, please consider who their other customers are. Cloudflare today provides services for many white supremacist we

by nrook 8y ago

Before you register your domain with Cloudflare, please consider who their other customers are. Cloudflare today provides services for many white supremacist websites; they kicked off the Daily Stormer in 2017 after widespread criticism, but still receive money from many others. From what I can see, their senior leadership genuinely believes that, morally, they have an obligation to provide services for horrible people in exchange for money[1]. If you agree, use them! But if you think it's bad to defend these sites in an era of white nationalist terrorism, look elsewhere. [1] https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-cloudflare/ https://www.wired.com/story/free-speech-issue-cloudflare/

RyJones 8y ago
I will make the exact opposite argument: who would trust Cloudflare as a registrar, after they dropped Daily Stormer in a fit of pique?
foobarbazetc 8y ago
My entire issue with this is that CloudFlare hides behind some “first amendment” type nonsense, which is literally is irrelevant outside US borders. Also, being a CF customer means sharing the same serving nodes as all those “interesting” websites. Some people are fine with that, others may not be. I upvoted you since Hacker News is protective of CF for obvious reasons. I don’t see why this isn’t open for debate.
tracker1 8y ago
You don't change peoples opinions by shutting them out, all that does is drive them deeper into their own echo chambers. It's usually a bad idea in practice. Freedom of speech means freedom of speech you don't agree with. There is no need to protect speech most people disagree with. FYI, the ACLU has also protected the same people you refer to. The problem with taking away civil liberties, is that eventually it will come down to losing your own. For example, if you want the government to shut down speech it doesn't like, what happens when opposing views are in power, and Donald Trump decides he doesn't like what YOU are saying. Do you really want to go there?
- nrook 8y ago
  I support the First Amendment wholeheartedly, and believe it's important that the government refrain from shutting down speech it doesn't like. You may note that Cloudflare is not a government.
  - tracker1 8y ago
    Considering how much traffic flows through it, you really think they don't have the more power than most governments? And while, the First Amendment doesn't provide protection from private parties, it is still possible to agree with Free Speech rights as a private company, even if you disagree with the message. The problem is when you start shutting down conversations, you become part of the problem. The likes of Twitter and Facebook, as an example are FAR more powerful than any government or localized platform traditionally protected, and may be considered Private Spaces for Public Use, which have been defined before (ref: Occupy Movement). Just because you are a private entity does not mean you are free to do anything you want. The government has LOTS of limitations on what businesses can or can't do. Unless you are suggesting that businesses should never have to comply with disability laws, or laws regarding other protected classes too?
stevenicr 8y ago
If they had not kicked stormer I would be jumping on this - unfortunately it shows me that it's another service that can not be trusted to remain a neutral dumb pipe. Even worse they showed the world that they can be used to take things down / offline. The day that happened I lost faith in American Internet, and actually now advocate for regulation of registrars and companies like cloudlfare - when you corner so much of the market (through low pricing using google's resources and others) for protecting transmission of data / information and you start blocking data on whims - you are no better then [insert other censorship regime here] - they are not the only ones, godaddy has shown itself as a censor for various groups and so have others. I can understand refusing to be a host / disabling hosting, but as far as data transmission, domain name registrars and similar internet functions, it should be let everything through and don't get involved imho.

by nrook 8y ago

RyJones 8y ago

I will make the exact opposite argument: who would trust Cloudflare as a registrar, after they dropped Daily Stormer in a fit of pique?

foobarbazetc 8y ago

My entire issue with this is that CloudFlare hides behind some “first amendment” type nonsense, which is literally is irrelevant outside US borders. Also, being a CF customer means sharing the same serving nodes as all those “interesting” websites. Some people are fine with that, others may not be. I upvoted you since Hacker News is protective of CF for obvious reasons. I don’t see why this isn’t open for debate.

tracker1 8y ago

You don't change peoples opinions by shutting them out, all that does is drive them deeper into their own echo chambers. It's usually a bad idea in practice. Freedom of speech means freedom of speech you don't agree with. There is no need to protect speech most people disagree with. FYI, the ACLU has also protected the same people you refer to. The problem with taking away civil liberties, is that eventually it will come down to losing your own. For example, if you want the government to shut down speech it doesn't like, what happens when opposing views are in power, and Donald Trump decides he doesn't like what YOU are saying. Do you really want to go there?

nrook 8y ago
I support the First Amendment wholeheartedly, and believe it's important that the government refrain from shutting down speech it doesn't like. You may note that Cloudflare is not a government.
- tracker1 8y ago
  Considering how much traffic flows through it, you really think they don't have the more power than most governments? And while, the First Amendment doesn't provide protection from private parties, it is still possible to agree with Free Speech rights as a private company, even if you disagree with the message. The problem is when you start shutting down conversations, you become part of the problem. The likes of Twitter and Facebook, as an example are FAR more powerful than any government or localized platform traditionally protected, and may be considered Private Spaces for Public Use, which have been defined before (ref: Occupy Movement). Just because you are a private entity does not mean you are free to do anything you want. The government has LOTS of limitations on what businesses can or can't do. Unless you are suggesting that businesses should never have to comply with disability laws, or laws regarding other protected classes too?

stevenicr 8y ago

If they had not kicked stormer I would be jumping on this - unfortunately it shows me that it's another service that can not be trusted to remain a neutral dumb pipe. Even worse they showed the world that they can be used to take things down / offline. The day that happened I lost faith in American Internet, and actually now advocate for regulation of registrars and companies like cloudlfare - when you corner so much of the market (through low pricing using google's resources and others) for protecting transmission of data / information and you start blocking data on whims - you are no better then [insert other censorship regime here] - they are not the only ones, godaddy has shown itself as a censor for various groups and so have others. I can understand refusing to be a host / disabling hosting, but as far as data transmission, domain name registrars and similar internet functions, it should be let everything through and don't get involved imho.