4 ms·

I don’t want infrastructure providers to play law enforcement. If they would have had received a court order and acted afterwards, I’d be okay with their decisi

I don’t want infrastructure providers to play law enforcement. If they would have had received a court order and acted afterwards, I’d be okay with their decision. But kicking customers for marketing? Meh.

doliveira 4y ago
So, they did it due to commercial reasons, not legal reasons? I assume they judged the commercial repercussions and decided keeping the content was a negative. Why do you think they should host it anyway?
- Minor49er 4y ago
  They didn't host the content, though. They were only providing DDoS protection
  - doliveira 4y ago
    Tomato, tomato. And in this case, Cloudflare does proxy and cache traffic through its infrastructure, that's their whole business model.
    - Minor49er 4y ago
      Tomato, tomato? There's a very big difference between a hosting provider and a caching service
      - doliveira 4y ago
        In terms of political, public and commercial repercussions, which is what the discussion is about? Not much difference at all.
        Minor49er 4y ago
        I'm glad you'll keep that in mind so you can describe these entities correctly in the future
stjohnswarts 4y ago
When it's a site trying to get people to kill people over the color of their skin and suicide themselves over being LGBQT, I don't have a problem with a private business saying they won't do business with you. There are plenty of other providers that will. I would be bothered by the government making a company do it however.