8 ms·

> the internet was worse without Cloudflare It had much more freedom. Currently it's up to Cloudflare to decide whether you will read that article or not. Tomo

> the internet was worse without Cloudflare It had much more freedom. Currently it's up to Cloudflare to decide whether you will read that article or not. Tomorrow some stupid law will mandate certain ideas to be hidden from children[1] and Cloudflare will happily comply. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

zenmac 1y ago
For example, recently certain big corp ask me to verify something. I clicked on the link in the E-Mail and it was suck on Cloudflare the click button over and over again. No matter how many times I clicked. Do I need to find another internet access now?
- paulgb 1y ago
  I would bet in the direction of this being a bug on big corp's side rather than Cloudflare's.
  - viraptor 1y ago
    No, it's a common issue. A bit of traffic is always misclassified and one day you'll be the unlucky one. And there's nothing you can do about it beyond trying different device on a different network.
- miki123211 1y ago
  You need to become more like a "normal person." No VPN (unless your ISP is extremely shady, then do use a VPN or change ISP), no overly zealous adblock (ublock origin on default settings should be fine), no JS blocking / weird privacy extensions / whatever, nno PiHole, just what your average, relatively tech-savvy geek would use. HN readerships's problems with Cloudflare are mostly their own fault. "normal" internet users don't have these problems[1]. [1] except for people in specific countries, and I do feel sorry for those.
  - throwaway77385 1y ago
    Hmmmm, it's rare that I'll bite, but in this instance, I just have to > You need to become more like a "normal person." Isn't in inherently problematic that there is even a definition of a "normal person"? Who gets to judge this? Why do I have to conform? This immediately creates in-groups and out-groups. We should all know better than to allow this to happen. Classification is fine. Probably even needed to help with inclusion. Restriction based on classification can very quickly become problematic. > No VPN (unless your ISP is extremely shady, then do use a VPN or change ISP) That's all ISPs by now. You should never just trust any authority logging what you do. What is fine today might not be fine with tomorrow's government and those logs (as much as some might pretend they are not) are permanent. VPN bans will start to pop up all over the place soon and everyone half-paying attention knows why > no overly zealous adblock (ublock origin on default settings should be fine) And what is the definition of overly zealous? Chrome has already dropped support for ublock, more or less. Adblocking is directly hostile to the data-hoovering machine. That should be enough reason to use very restrictive adblocking. I am using every filter list there is with Firefox on Linux. Cloudflare's checks are basically always fine. ReCaptcha, however, is a nightmare. > no JS blocking / weird privacy extensions / whatever Well, most of the web doesn't work when blocking JS outright. So I guess we've lost that battle. Though I'd argue that things like reader-mode and the ability to just get text content is pretty important to quite a lot of people still, especially those with disabilities. I don't understand the derogatory tone used when calling privacy extensions weird and the 'whatever' part is just a flippant dismissal of an entire ecosystem of extensions and applications that have a right to exist > nno PiHole PiHole is soon going to be the only way to protect yourself, considering what Google is pushing for with manifest v3. I don't yet use it, because it's a pain in the ass, but I'd rather have less internet and more control than vice versa > just what your average, relatively tech-savvy geek would use. Why do you think that you should be the one to define what or who that is? Furthermore, why should anyone be given that right? What are we really losing by allowing people to have custom setups vs. what are we losing when we don't? > HN readerships's problems with Cloudflare are mostly their own fault. "normal" internet users don't have these problems This reliance on the definition of "normal" is problematic, for the aforementioned reasons. You don't know what normal is and having a gate-keeper of this definition will lead to ever-smaller circles of people falling under that definition, until one day you are no longer normal and then what? > [1] except for people in specific countries, and I do feel sorry for those. Get ready to feel sorry for yourself in the near future :)
chipgap98 1y ago
How is this not a problem with the law rather than a problem with Cloudflare?
- Spivak 1y ago
  Because human nature is what it is. The best way to eat better isn't to be a better person, it's to not keep junk food at the house. It's not Cloudflare's fault that they're successful, but it's now everyone's problem that they're an easy throat for governments to choke.
  - ipaddr 1y ago
    It is their fault they are successful. They worked hard to get there.
- tavavex 1y ago
  It's both. In allowing Cloudflare to grow so big, we now have one huge universal button for governments to push. If instead all of these customers were dispersed over hundreds of different services from different countries, good luck with trying to keep them all in line with your specific country's whims.
  - otabdeveloper4 1y ago
    Worse, governments can also just block Cloudflare's IP ranges wholesale - because Cloudflare is used to launder IP addresses for sites with shady and/or illegal content. Legitimate sites get blocked too, but most governments probably won't care.
    - DoctorOW 1y ago
      Isn't this an argument in favor of centralization? Right now, those legitimate sites include many government websites which means that most governments do care. You know what IP block they definitely don't use? A tiny provider for DIY blogs or whatever.
- 1y ago
stickfigure 1y ago
> It had much more freedom ...right up until you got DDoS'd off the internet by some script kiddie "for the lolz".
- egorfine 1y ago
  That's the flipside.
- GoblinSlayer 1y ago
  Script kiddies pay for a botnet to DDoS for lulz?
ezfe 1y ago
It's not up to Cloudflare, it's up to the businesses that choose Cloudflare for that protection.
osigurdson 1y ago
>> Currently it's up to Cloudflare to decide whether you will read that article or not. How is Cloudflare gatekeeping things? I believe you but don't understand the mechanism.
- nemomarx 1y ago
  Cloudflare sends certain users they think are bots into infinite captcha loops - the wrong user agent or tor endpoint can do it
  - osigurdson 1y ago
    I assume this is only on sites that are on Cloudflare though. Or, no?
    - selfhoster11 1y ago
      True, but a lot of sites use Cloudflare. It's sometimes very unexpected sites as well, both very large ones and very small ones.
  - arevno 1y ago
    Yes, it's unfortunate that a network service provider whose primary business model is checks notes preventing network abuse would try to detect and prevent abuse via various heuristics such as captchas. I also agree that Cloudflare should get all the blame here, since none of their customers voluntarily chose to use them, and Cloudflare doesn't give their customers a huge variety of options for bot detection sensitivity. Matt Prince personally kidnaps CTOs and waterboards them until they agree to use Cloudflare, and the thousands of configuration options and rule combinations on the WAF are just for show - customers can't actually use them. What an evil, evil company.
    - GoblinSlayer 1y ago
      It's the same people who believe software has no settings.
- 1y ago
_heimdall 1y ago
Nearly any company under a government's jurisdiction will comply to a legal order to censor content, especially if its done in the claimed goal of protecting children. Those companies that don't comply will be shut down or targeted in some way if the legal order had any political teeth behind it. There's no way around that unfortunately, short of limiting government power in the first place so such an order would never be lawful.
- chii 1y ago
  that's why the gov't has somehow shut down torrenting and piracy. Oh wait...
  - thewebguyd 1y ago
    Piracy is already operating outside of the law, there's no corporation to take legal action against, only individuals. A company is (usually) operating within the law, and if they wish to stay operating, have to follow the laws of the nations they operate in.
    - chii 1y ago
      in other words, i was trying to imply that the only way to prevent gov't overreach is to continue developing technical solutions which are distributed and decentralized, so that there's no single button for which the gov't could press for removal of these fundamental rights.
- miki123211 1y ago
  The problem with Cloudflare is that it does business everywhere, so it has to appease all governments. If you're a news site registered in the US or a porn site registered in Canada, with relatively few ties in other countries, you have far much less pressure to comply with unreasonable demands from India or Bahrain. They just don't have that much leverage. If you use Cloudflare, they can put the pressure on Cloudflare instead. To make matters worse, some governments will demand worldwide removal / blocking of certain content they don't like. This is what makes the internet so weird and pre-internet intuitions about how governments work so treacherous.
thedelanyo 1y ago
What's stopping you from creating a competitive feature?
- egorfine 1y ago
  Nothing. Are going to use it? No, you're probably picking the best out there which is Cloudflare. And then it's Cloudflare who's gonna decide whether I can read your article or not.
Crosseye_Jack 1y ago
> Tomorrow some stupid law will mandate certain ideas to be hidden from children[1] and Cloudflare will happily comply. Already happening, Well its more more "think about the big corps" than think of the children, for now.... https://torrentfreak.com/cloudflare-starts-blocking-pirate-sites-for-uk-users-thats-a-pretty-big-deal-250715/ https://torrentfreak.com/cloudflare-starts-blocking-pirate-s...

zenmac 1y ago

For example, recently certain big corp ask me to verify something. I clicked on the link in the E-Mail and it was suck on Cloudflare the click button over and over again. No matter how many times I clicked. Do I need to find another internet access now?

paulgb 1y ago
I would bet in the direction of this being a bug on big corp's side rather than Cloudflare's.
- viraptor 1y ago
  No, it's a common issue. A bit of traffic is always misclassified and one day you'll be the unlucky one. And there's nothing you can do about it beyond trying different device on a different network.
miki123211 1y ago
You need to become more like a "normal person." No VPN (unless your ISP is extremely shady, then do use a VPN or change ISP), no overly zealous adblock (ublock origin on default settings should be fine), no JS blocking / weird privacy extensions / whatever, nno PiHole, just what your average, relatively tech-savvy geek would use. HN readerships's problems with Cloudflare are mostly their own fault. "normal" internet users don't have these problems[1]. [1] except for people in specific countries, and I do feel sorry for those.
- throwaway77385 1y ago
  Hmmmm, it's rare that I'll bite, but in this instance, I just have to > You need to become more like a "normal person." Isn't in inherently problematic that there is even a definition of a "normal person"? Who gets to judge this? Why do I have to conform? This immediately creates in-groups and out-groups. We should all know better than to allow this to happen. Classification is fine. Probably even needed to help with inclusion. Restriction based on classification can very quickly become problematic. > No VPN (unless your ISP is extremely shady, then do use a VPN or change ISP) That's all ISPs by now. You should never just trust any authority logging what you do. What is fine today might not be fine with tomorrow's government and those logs (as much as some might pretend they are not) are permanent. VPN bans will start to pop up all over the place soon and everyone half-paying attention knows why > no overly zealous adblock (ublock origin on default settings should be fine) And what is the definition of overly zealous? Chrome has already dropped support for ublock, more or less. Adblocking is directly hostile to the data-hoovering machine. That should be enough reason to use very restrictive adblocking. I am using every filter list there is with Firefox on Linux. Cloudflare's checks are basically always fine. ReCaptcha, however, is a nightmare. > no JS blocking / weird privacy extensions / whatever Well, most of the web doesn't work when blocking JS outright. So I guess we've lost that battle. Though I'd argue that things like reader-mode and the ability to just get text content is pretty important to quite a lot of people still, especially those with disabilities. I don't understand the derogatory tone used when calling privacy extensions weird and the 'whatever' part is just a flippant dismissal of an entire ecosystem of extensions and applications that have a right to exist > nno PiHole PiHole is soon going to be the only way to protect yourself, considering what Google is pushing for with manifest v3. I don't yet use it, because it's a pain in the ass, but I'd rather have less internet and more control than vice versa > just what your average, relatively tech-savvy geek would use. Why do you think that you should be the one to define what or who that is? Furthermore, why should anyone be given that right? What are we really losing by allowing people to have custom setups vs. what are we losing when we don't? > HN readerships's problems with Cloudflare are mostly their own fault. "normal" internet users don't have these problems This reliance on the definition of "normal" is problematic, for the aforementioned reasons. You don't know what normal is and having a gate-keeper of this definition will lead to ever-smaller circles of people falling under that definition, until one day you are no longer normal and then what? > [1] except for people in specific countries, and I do feel sorry for those. Get ready to feel sorry for yourself in the near future :)

chipgap98 1y ago

How is this not a problem with the law rather than a problem with Cloudflare?

Spivak 1y ago
Because human nature is what it is. The best way to eat better isn't to be a better person, it's to not keep junk food at the house. It's not Cloudflare's fault that they're successful, but it's now everyone's problem that they're an easy throat for governments to choke.
- ipaddr 1y ago
  It is their fault they are successful. They worked hard to get there.
tavavex 1y ago
It's both. In allowing Cloudflare to grow so big, we now have one huge universal button for governments to push. If instead all of these customers were dispersed over hundreds of different services from different countries, good luck with trying to keep them all in line with your specific country's whims.
- otabdeveloper4 1y ago
  Worse, governments can also just block Cloudflare's IP ranges wholesale - because Cloudflare is used to launder IP addresses for sites with shady and/or illegal content. Legitimate sites get blocked too, but most governments probably won't care.
  - DoctorOW 1y ago
    Isn't this an argument in favor of centralization? Right now, those legitimate sites include many government websites which means that most governments do care. You know what IP block they definitely don't use? A tiny provider for DIY blogs or whatever.
1y ago

stickfigure 1y ago

> It had much more freedom ...right up until you got DDoS'd off the internet by some script kiddie "for the lolz".

egorfine 1y ago
That's the flipside.
GoblinSlayer 1y ago
Script kiddies pay for a botnet to DDoS for lulz?

ezfe 1y ago

It's not up to Cloudflare, it's up to the businesses that choose Cloudflare for that protection.

osigurdson 1y ago

>> Currently it's up to Cloudflare to decide whether you will read that article or not. How is Cloudflare gatekeeping things? I believe you but don't understand the mechanism.

nemomarx 1y ago
Cloudflare sends certain users they think are bots into infinite captcha loops - the wrong user agent or tor endpoint can do it
- osigurdson 1y ago
  I assume this is only on sites that are on Cloudflare though. Or, no?
  - selfhoster11 1y ago
    True, but a lot of sites use Cloudflare. It's sometimes very unexpected sites as well, both very large ones and very small ones.
- arevno 1y ago
  Yes, it's unfortunate that a network service provider whose primary business model is checks notes preventing network abuse would try to detect and prevent abuse via various heuristics such as captchas. I also agree that Cloudflare should get all the blame here, since none of their customers voluntarily chose to use them, and Cloudflare doesn't give their customers a huge variety of options for bot detection sensitivity. Matt Prince personally kidnaps CTOs and waterboards them until they agree to use Cloudflare, and the thousands of configuration options and rule combinations on the WAF are just for show - customers can't actually use them. What an evil, evil company.
  - GoblinSlayer 1y ago
    It's the same people who believe software has no settings.
1y ago

_heimdall 1y ago

Nearly any company under a government's jurisdiction will comply to a legal order to censor content, especially if its done in the claimed goal of protecting children. Those companies that don't comply will be shut down or targeted in some way if the legal order had any political teeth behind it. There's no way around that unfortunately, short of limiting government power in the first place so such an order would never be lawful.

chii 1y ago
that's why the gov't has somehow shut down torrenting and piracy. Oh wait...
- thewebguyd 1y ago
  Piracy is already operating outside of the law, there's no corporation to take legal action against, only individuals. A company is (usually) operating within the law, and if they wish to stay operating, have to follow the laws of the nations they operate in.
  - chii 1y ago
    in other words, i was trying to imply that the only way to prevent gov't overreach is to continue developing technical solutions which are distributed and decentralized, so that there's no single button for which the gov't could press for removal of these fundamental rights.
miki123211 1y ago
The problem with Cloudflare is that it does business everywhere, so it has to appease all governments. If you're a news site registered in the US or a porn site registered in Canada, with relatively few ties in other countries, you have far much less pressure to comply with unreasonable demands from India or Bahrain. They just don't have that much leverage. If you use Cloudflare, they can put the pressure on Cloudflare instead. To make matters worse, some governments will demand worldwide removal / blocking of certain content they don't like. This is what makes the internet so weird and pre-internet intuitions about how governments work so treacherous.

thedelanyo 1y ago

What's stopping you from creating a competitive feature?

egorfine 1y ago
Nothing. Are going to use it? No, you're probably picking the best out there which is Cloudflare. And then it's Cloudflare who's gonna decide whether I can read your article or not.

Crosseye_Jack 1y ago

> Tomorrow some stupid law will mandate certain ideas to be hidden from children[1] and Cloudflare will happily comply. Already happening, Well its more more "think about the big corps" than think of the children, for now.... https://torrentfreak.com/cloudflare-starts-blocking-pirate-sites-for-uk-users-thats-a-pretty-big-deal-250715/ https://torrentfreak.com/cloudflare-starts-blocking-pirate-s...