4 ms·
I just tried this out: % npx wrangler deploy --temporary wrangler 4.103.0 ──────────────────── You must accept Cloudflare's Terms of Service (htt
by simonw 4mo ago
I just tried this out:
% npx wrangler deploy --temporary
wrangler 4.103.0
────────────────────
You must accept Cloudflare's Terms of Service (https://www.cloudflare.com/terms/) and Privacy Policy (https://www.cloudflare.com/privacypolicy/) in order to continue. By typing "yes", you agree to these terms. Type "yes" to continue. … yes
Solving proof-of-work challenge…
Temporary account ready:
Account: Educated Celery (created)
Claim within: 60 minutes
Claim URL: https://dash.cloudflare.com/claim-preview?claimToken=CAVe7LzWiGad-redacted
Total Upload: 13.79 KiB / gzip: 4.12 KiB
Uploaded cloudflare-redirect-resolver (2.27 sec)
Deployed cloudflare-redirect-resolver triggers (0.50 sec)
https://cloudflare-redirect-resolver.educated-celery.workers.dev
Current Version ID: 5c12da7f-2749-4ccc-a8f6-79b85da98d10
I'm amused that it made me accept the terms and conditions without any indication of who I am, but it did work - https://cloudflare-redirect-resolver.educated-celery.workers.dev https://cloudflare-redirect-resolver.educated-celery.workers... will be live for the next 59 minutes.
- avipars 4mo agoYou might want to claim the link or remove it
- xyzzy_plugh 4mo agoWhy?
- throw1234567891 4mo agoWhy not
- simonw 4mo agoI redacted it, but if anyone still has at and wants to steal my demo app they're welcome to it.
- bstsb 4mo ago> I'm amused that it made me accept the terms and conditions without any indication of who I am as far as i’m aware, that’s fully binding and often an accepted practise - take Minecraft’s server software, where you must accept the EULA with a text flag before running
- nextaccountic 4mo agobut if an agent automatically accepts an EULA for you, is it binding?
- halJordan 4mo agoIt would have to be. And it's not new in the law at all. The principal-agent problem was one of the main enablers of the golden age of piracy. But that doesn't mean it isnt a solved problem now (in the law and practically)
- nextaccountic 4mo ago> principal-agent problem Here the agent is not a person. It's unclear this principle holds legally
- sandeepkd 4mo agoThis is a binding from service perspective. The agent use case is being highlighted in this example, however in practice the server does not knows what/who the client is. In fact with API's (user not present in loop) just notifying is good enough based on what I have been told by company legal teams in the past. Ideally the agent is supposed to be responsible to surface its own TOS and the downstream TOS to the user. In other words most likely the agent is on the hook if this goes to court
- inigyou 4mo agoThis has never been tried in court, though, at best it probably just protects mojang from liability for banning your server from the IP address entry box (that's a real thing they do) if you don't obey
- winterqt 4mo agoInteresting, it’s still live!
- usef- 4mo agoMaybe someone else claimed it?
- johanyc 4mo agoStill live lol
- deanputney 4mo agoYeah, it's still up at this time. That's surprising that it's not being auto cleaned up.
- WolfCop 4mo agoWhy a GET and cancel after headers instead of a HEAD?
- simonw 4mo agoI don't trust everyone online to correctly implement HEAD requests. I'm quite possibly being overly paranoid.
- LoganDark 4mo agoBy making it require interactive input to accept TOS they've made most agents unable to use it, but the effort is cool!