4 ms·

Seems to me they're operating on a matter of principle. The Christians who run my local food bank do similar. Their clients include some of the worst people: r

Seems to me they're operating on a matter of principle. The Christians who run my local food bank do similar. Their clients include some of the worst people: rapists, paedophiles, murders - released from prison, with nothing and no-one to help them, other than these kind churchly individuals. Their principle is that Jesus would want them to help their fellow humans in need, no matter what their sins. So they do. Obviously it's a bit different with Cloudflare as they're a for-profit company of diversely ideological employees, not a non-profit charity of devoutly religious volunteers. But the former type of organisation can run on principles other than making money hand-over-fist too.

sofixa 4y ago
I think you can appreciate the difference between not letting former criminals (released from jail) starve and helping them integrate back in society, and actively providing them tools that they use to do terrible things, including crimes.
- ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
  KF is just a forum, nothing posted there is illegal.
  - kevingadd 4y ago
    Sadly, laws do in fact prohibit the posting of certain kinds of information and messages - for example, death threats, dox or hate speech, depending on your locale. Being "just a forum" does not change this. We can debate whether the laws should restrict speech that way, but don't pretend the laws in western countries don't exist.
    - ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
    - OrangeMonkey 4y ago
      Sounds great - if a website is hosting content that is illegal, then there are laws that can be enforced by the government. The government, in the united states at least, cannot restrict freedom of speech. Its kind of a big deal. Hoping that corporations revoke their ddos protection so that terrorists can ddos them down is laughable. "I know the government can't do it, but ... just walk away wink wink and I am sure the problem will be fixed wink wink". Come on.
      - zimpenfish 4y ago
        > The government, in the united states at least, cannot restrict freedom of speech. But USGOV doesn't run Cloudflare. They are perfectly able to pick and choose their own customers without any reference to 1A. > if a website is hosting content that is illegal No-one is obliged to service them.
        OrangeMonkey 4y ago
        You seem to misunderstand - or at least I hope you are misunderstanding. If a group is doing something illegal, the government should act. You seem to imply "Well if they are doing something illegal, people shouldn't have to work with them." I think you know what I know - they aren't going to be targeted by the government because they are not, in fact, doing something illegal.
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        > If a group is doing something illegal, the government should act. Yes but as you surely know, the government has limited resources which precludes them from acting on every illegal act in a timely manner. Which means that groups can, and do, get away with illegal acts for a long time before they get to the front of the queue for being dealt with. > they aren't going to be targeted by the government because they are not, in fact, doing something illegal. It is a fact that the government may not target you because you are not doing something illegal - 100%, yes. But it is also a fact that you can be doing something illegal for a long time before the government targets you. You cannot use government inaction as proof one way or the other.
  - zorpner 4y ago
    The devil has enough advocates. Don't feel the need to throw your hat into the ring.
    - ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
braingenious 4y ago
>Seems to me they're operating on a matter of principle. That’s what I’m talking about. The “principle” argument is genuinely funny! They have unlimited power but because they’ve chosen to follow an arbitrary rule based on their arbitrary definition of neutrality, they have no power. It’s a coincidence that they enable doxxing, harassment and DDOS-for-hire because they’re religiously bound by a sacred covenant! They dare not cross the ancient gods lest blood and pestilence rain down upon all our heads! They’re not making a choice to continue enabling harassment, doxxing and DDOS-for-hire, they are simply doing as the sacred runes prescribe, as all orthodox stewards of the realm should and would do. It’s actually noble, we should actually be thanking them for acting this way. It’s just plain funny. As for your food bank analogy, do they provide food for active murderers and pedophiles? Like, if they were visited by current victims and the families of victims asking them for help, would they respond with a box of food for the perpetrators and tell the victims to kick rocks?
- ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
  >DDOS-for-hire KF uses cloudflair specifically because it's haters try to DDOS the site.
- OrangeMonkey 4y ago
  The only reason someone would advocate to turn off ddos protection for a site, is so someone can perform terroristic acts against the site and ddos it until it goes down. How about it - you tell me. What reason would so many people, maybe in this thread chain, argue so strongly for a company to revoke its ddos protection of a website they dont like. Its weird right?
  - braingenious 4y ago
    I would suggest that you take that question up with Cloudflare, as they just disabled DDOS protection for KF.
    - OrangeMonkey 4y ago
      Got it - but I'm asking you. It appears you were hoping that they would remove it. What possible reason did you have to hope that a site took away their ddos protection? Its weird right?
jonstewart 4y ago
Helping other sinners eat is a bit different than one company helping another company sell hate on the internet.

sofixa 4y ago

I think you can appreciate the difference between not letting former criminals (released from jail) starve and helping them integrate back in society, and actively providing them tools that they use to do terrible things, including crimes.

ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
KF is just a forum, nothing posted there is illegal.
- kevingadd 4y ago
  Sadly, laws do in fact prohibit the posting of certain kinds of information and messages - for example, death threats, dox or hate speech, depending on your locale. Being "just a forum" does not change this. We can debate whether the laws should restrict speech that way, but don't pretend the laws in western countries don't exist.
  - ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
  - OrangeMonkey 4y ago
    Sounds great - if a website is hosting content that is illegal, then there are laws that can be enforced by the government. The government, in the united states at least, cannot restrict freedom of speech. Its kind of a big deal. Hoping that corporations revoke their ddos protection so that terrorists can ddos them down is laughable. "I know the government can't do it, but ... just walk away wink wink and I am sure the problem will be fixed wink wink". Come on.
    - zimpenfish 4y ago
      > The government, in the united states at least, cannot restrict freedom of speech. But USGOV doesn't run Cloudflare. They are perfectly able to pick and choose their own customers without any reference to 1A. > if a website is hosting content that is illegal No-one is obliged to service them.
      - OrangeMonkey 4y ago
        You seem to misunderstand - or at least I hope you are misunderstanding. If a group is doing something illegal, the government should act. You seem to imply "Well if they are doing something illegal, people shouldn't have to work with them." I think you know what I know - they aren't going to be targeted by the government because they are not, in fact, doing something illegal.
        zimpenfish 4y ago
        > If a group is doing something illegal, the government should act. Yes but as you surely know, the government has limited resources which precludes them from acting on every illegal act in a timely manner. Which means that groups can, and do, get away with illegal acts for a long time before they get to the front of the queue for being dealt with. > they aren't going to be targeted by the government because they are not, in fact, doing something illegal. It is a fact that the government may not target you because you are not doing something illegal - 100%, yes. But it is also a fact that you can be doing something illegal for a long time before the government targets you. You cannot use government inaction as proof one way or the other.
- zorpner 4y ago
  The devil has enough advocates. Don't feel the need to throw your hat into the ring.
  - ThrowawayTestr 4y ago

braingenious 4y ago

>Seems to me they're operating on a matter of principle. That’s what I’m talking about. The “principle” argument is genuinely funny! They have unlimited power but because they’ve chosen to follow an arbitrary rule based on their arbitrary definition of neutrality, they have no power. It’s a coincidence that they enable doxxing, harassment and DDOS-for-hire because they’re religiously bound by a sacred covenant! They dare not cross the ancient gods lest blood and pestilence rain down upon all our heads! They’re not making a choice to continue enabling harassment, doxxing and DDOS-for-hire, they are simply doing as the sacred runes prescribe, as all orthodox stewards of the realm should and would do. It’s actually noble, we should actually be thanking them for acting this way. It’s just plain funny. As for your food bank analogy, do they provide food for active murderers and pedophiles? Like, if they were visited by current victims and the families of victims asking them for help, would they respond with a box of food for the perpetrators and tell the victims to kick rocks?

ThrowawayTestr 4y ago
>DDOS-for-hire KF uses cloudflair specifically because it's haters try to DDOS the site.
OrangeMonkey 4y ago
The only reason someone would advocate to turn off ddos protection for a site, is so someone can perform terroristic acts against the site and ddos it until it goes down. How about it - you tell me. What reason would so many people, maybe in this thread chain, argue so strongly for a company to revoke its ddos protection of a website they dont like. Its weird right?
- braingenious 4y ago
  I would suggest that you take that question up with Cloudflare, as they just disabled DDOS protection for KF.
  - OrangeMonkey 4y ago
    Got it - but I'm asking you. It appears you were hoping that they would remove it. What possible reason did you have to hope that a site took away their ddos protection? Its weird right?

jonstewart 4y ago

Helping other sinners eat is a bit different than one company helping another company sell hate on the internet.