4 ms·

It depends on the topic of discussion. If we are discussing the viability of a company, and trying to project long term success, then this is all good news. If

It depends on the topic of discussion. If we are discussing the viability of a company, and trying to project long term success, then this is all good news. If you are discussing whats best for society and how these businesses impact those things, then this could be alarming news.

dmix 7y ago
There's a big shift towards privacy happening now. If Cloudflare came out a decade ago I'd also be in their camp. But the risks are too high and developers are starting to recognize that Cloudflare is far from free and comes with long terms consequences for the health and resiliency of the internet. I appreciate how they pushed HTTPs widely. But now that's Let's encrypt exists there's no excuse. Ill also never forgive them for making Tor completely unusable for accessing any normal website. It's almost impossible to pass the security checks and if you do another one is coming once you switch IP. I understand Tor is a niche product but it's an important one for activists and other persecuted people. And it will only continue to grow in importance as the dictators all learn how to do NSA style mass surveillance. The DDOS stuff if the harder problem to solve and I don't know enough about it to judge the competition's ability to offer it safely and privacy friendly way.
- JakeTheAndroid 7y ago
  I mean, that's like your opinion or whatever, sure. But this S-1 filing is about if they are a sustainable business. And none of what you touched on would seem to have any serious impact on their business model. The Tor stuff feels way over blown to me. I worked at CF while it was a problem, and was an avid Tor user at the time. It was a terrible user experience, but it wasn't completely Cloudflare's fault. They didn't target Tor users, Tor exit nodes have terrible IP rep which is an industry standard for risk rating IPs. ReCaptcha had some functional issues that could not be solved by Cloudflare. And lastly, site owners did next to nothing to support their Tor visitors even once dedicated options were available via the IP Firewall. This seems like hyperbole, especially as JGC was avid about getting this resolved, and was very public with the discourse. Companies don't do things perfect all the time, and it seems extreme to hold CF purely responsible and hold onto that anger for something that's long been resolved. In the end, everything in this S-1 is promising for people interested in tech businesses, which is what many people are praising. They already generate a profit, their operation costs are reasonable, etc.
  - kingbirdy 7y ago
    > They already generate a profit, their operation costs are reasonable, etc. They don't turn a profit, and their operating costs are growing sharply. From the S-1: > As we continue to invest in our business, we have incurred net losses of $17.3 million, $10.7 million, and $87.2 million for 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively.
  - dmix 7y ago
    There's always a compromise with privacy that people are willing to ignore in the short term, but I'd rather bet on long-term trendlines than people's laziness today. Their business model of taking over and centralizing whole sections of internet will continually cause a backlash. They only have a percentage of all traffic today and it continues to increase. And apparently so does their willingness to not be a neutral service provider as we saw with 8chan, which is in stark contrast to their policy towards the LulzSec hackers and plenty of other "bad guys". I'm sure Cloudflare will continue to be a good business in the short-term, but that should never be the relevant metric for any business. But it will become more and more obvious to everyone the bigger they get.
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  > Ill also never forgive them for making Tor completely unusable for accessing any normal website. Is the privacy pass extension an invalid fix for the problem?

dmix 7y ago

There's a big shift towards privacy happening now. If Cloudflare came out a decade ago I'd also be in their camp. But the risks are too high and developers are starting to recognize that Cloudflare is far from free and comes with long terms consequences for the health and resiliency of the internet. I appreciate how they pushed HTTPs widely. But now that's Let's encrypt exists there's no excuse. Ill also never forgive them for making Tor completely unusable for accessing any normal website. It's almost impossible to pass the security checks and if you do another one is coming once you switch IP. I understand Tor is a niche product but it's an important one for activists and other persecuted people. And it will only continue to grow in importance as the dictators all learn how to do NSA style mass surveillance. The DDOS stuff if the harder problem to solve and I don't know enough about it to judge the competition's ability to offer it safely and privacy friendly way.

JakeTheAndroid 7y ago
I mean, that's like your opinion or whatever, sure. But this S-1 filing is about if they are a sustainable business. And none of what you touched on would seem to have any serious impact on their business model. The Tor stuff feels way over blown to me. I worked at CF while it was a problem, and was an avid Tor user at the time. It was a terrible user experience, but it wasn't completely Cloudflare's fault. They didn't target Tor users, Tor exit nodes have terrible IP rep which is an industry standard for risk rating IPs. ReCaptcha had some functional issues that could not be solved by Cloudflare. And lastly, site owners did next to nothing to support their Tor visitors even once dedicated options were available via the IP Firewall. This seems like hyperbole, especially as JGC was avid about getting this resolved, and was very public with the discourse. Companies don't do things perfect all the time, and it seems extreme to hold CF purely responsible and hold onto that anger for something that's long been resolved. In the end, everything in this S-1 is promising for people interested in tech businesses, which is what many people are praising. They already generate a profit, their operation costs are reasonable, etc.
- kingbirdy 7y ago
  > They already generate a profit, their operation costs are reasonable, etc. They don't turn a profit, and their operating costs are growing sharply. From the S-1: > As we continue to invest in our business, we have incurred net losses of $17.3 million, $10.7 million, and $87.2 million for 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively.
- dmix 7y ago
  There's always a compromise with privacy that people are willing to ignore in the short term, but I'd rather bet on long-term trendlines than people's laziness today. Their business model of taking over and centralizing whole sections of internet will continually cause a backlash. They only have a percentage of all traffic today and it continues to increase. And apparently so does their willingness to not be a neutral service provider as we saw with 8chan, which is in stark contrast to their policy towards the LulzSec hackers and plenty of other "bad guys". I'm sure Cloudflare will continue to be a good business in the short-term, but that should never be the relevant metric for any business. But it will become more and more obvious to everyone the bigger they get.
Dylan16807 7y ago
> Ill also never forgive them for making Tor completely unusable for accessing any normal website. Is the privacy pass extension an invalid fix for the problem?