3 ms·
I understand your point and largely agree with the idea that corporations shouldn't become de-facto governments with regard to morality/free-speech/etc. However
by mojzu 4y ago
I understand your point and largely agree with the idea that corporations shouldn't become de-facto governments with regard to morality/free-speech/etc. However I think it's important to acknowledge that there's a really difficult problem to solve here with regards to spam, astroturfing and harassment/trolling (if not more areas) where allowing everything that is technically legal would make most online spaces unbearable to participate in for the vast majority of people (e.g. 4chan and its ilk). And the line between moderating those things and censorship is incredibly blurry
- colechristensen 4y agoIt is not Cloudflare's job to moderate a website they provide network services to. This is a different issue than a social network doing moderation and spam prevention on its own platform. It is not Cloudflare's job to protect Twitter or wherever else from a forum of assholes.
- phillipcarter 4y agoIt's not Cloudflare's job to do anything. They can just stop DDoS protection for everyone BUT nazi sites if they want to. That's called freedom! ...but they're not free from public reactions to their choices.
- mojzu 4y agoAlthough I'd agree there is a difference I think these issues are closer than you think, for example if Cloudflare was providing network services to a website dedicated to spam, trolling or harrassment. These things in many jurisdictions are not illegal but many companies will refuse to support them because they are actively bad for business (driving existing or potential customers away, making their own products worse, etc.). Ideals can be great but trying to apply them without considering the effects, intended or not, can lead to poor results