4 ms·

It's looking good until you start to see the US gov forcing cloudflare to block hugging face and others.

by bilekas 4mo ago

15155 4mo ago
Why do they need to "force Cloudflare" to do anything? Why wouldn't they just tell Hugging Face that they need to abide export restrictions directly - they're an American company? Doesn't sound dystopian enough without a second compelled entity?
- bilekas 4mo ago
  Because the models don't necessarily need to be hosted on hugging face. You can create a Model Card repository containing your README and from there you include instructions or a custom script in your repository that allows authenticated users to download the model. > Doesn't sound dystopian enough without a second compelled entity? This is the second snarky question you've made today, the other in relation to the export limit. > Is this just upsetting because it's a product you want to enjoy? Both are assumptions you are making and don't provide much in the way of constructive conversation, if I'm wrong about something it's alright to just point it out.
  - 15155 4mo ago
    > don't necessarily need to be hosted on hugging face. Export restrictions don't split generally hairs on technicalities like "hosting" - the "but magnet links aren't actually torrents!" defense doesn't fly when $1M fines and federal felonies are at stake. All distribution or "causing" distribution to restricted entities is prohibited. > This is the second snarky question you've made today It's not snark: why would Cloudflare somehow be legally or technically relevant in the context of two American companies distributing export-restricted materials? HN seems to love the "Cloudflare controls the internet!" "NSA bad!" trope.
    - bilekas 4mo ago
      > Export restrictions don't split generally hairs on technicalities like "hosting" - the "but magnet links aren't actually torrents!" defense doesn't fly when $1M fines and federal felonies are at stake. All distribution or "causing" distribution to restricted entities is prohibited. So why would open models that are not in the US be restricted ? The government would need to subpoena each model that was in the US individually, why would they do that when they could simply pull clout over CloudFlare, which we have seen governments do around the world. Either CloudFlare comply, or they're added a block list. > https://cybersecurityadvisors.network/2025/04/15/la-liga-blocking-of-cloudflare-ips-in-spain/ https://cybersecurityadvisors.network/2025/04/15/la-liga-blo... This is not a new thing, anyway this discussion has become too argumentative for an off the cuff comment about government over-reach.
      - 15155 4mo ago
        > So why would open models that are not in the US be restricted ? Nobody said they would be? > subpoena each model that was in the US individually What does this even mean? Where did 'subpoenas' come into this conversation and how would that be useful? > simply pull clout over CloudFlare Cloudflare is an American CDN. Hugging Face is an American catalog/distributor (whatever semantic game you want to play) of models. Some of those models could be declared export-regulated. No subpoena is necessary to prevent Hugging Face or Cloudflare from distributing ITAR/EAR software, declaring any model as such, nor is trying to block something heavy-handedly at the CDN level necessary: Hugging Face will gladly comply with fine-grained requests. "La Liga" obviously isn't American, which is why Spanish courts are compelling their ISPs (who they actually do control) to block Cloudflare IPs. Cloudflare's customers - who are likely not Spanish - are distributing materials Spanish courts do not approve of. If Spain had the means to compel Cloudflare or their customers in question to do anything, they wouldn't need to take such a blunt approach and block other legitimate customers. Cloudflare isn't involved in that equation and this isn't at all equivalent.
        bilekas 4mo ago
        I'm going to give you some free advice. Don't assume so much. It's usually a bad start to your point of view, if you assume, you only know what's in your head and not the facts of the matter so sometimes it can come across as if you're saying something you have insight into, but when other people know better, it sounds quite ignorant. Honestly. It's been sage advice for me. And maybe for others. Edit : There's no need to be so argumentative also, I'm not 'against' you or your point, just pointing out some other pov. We're here to discuss.
avaer 4mo ago
They'll just make it a crime to run the models unless they authorize you (classifying it as a munition, like they tried to do with encryption), and if your power bill is suspicious you'll find yourself in jail. Any company providing the models will be deemed a threat to national security. No need to block the download.
- 15155 4mo ago
  Citizens were and are free to use the technology (cryptography and every other export-controlled item); your "power bill is suspicious, go to jail" FUD doesn't really track with history. > Any company providing the models will be deemed a threat to national security. Any company providing specifically-controlled models to foreigners would hypothetically be prosecuted.
  - avaer 4mo ago
    There's a famous poem called "First They Came" about how slippery this slope can be in a heated political climate. I don't believe for a second this ends with "foreigners", this is about setting up infrastructure for controlling the technology. Foreigners are just the current excuse. Note that TFA mentions they are supposedly hand-picking access to whoever they want, based on whatever criteria they want, already.
    - 15155 4mo ago
      Ah, invoking Godwin. "First they came" in 1976 when ITAR was first passed, or maybe "first they came" in the 1940s when we didn't export Proximity Fuzes, right? Countries are free to prevent exports of technology. Equating export controls with the Holocaust is disgusting.
      - avaer 4mo ago
        I did not bring in Godwin, but I guess he's here now :D. I'm more trying to invoke GRRM. This is a Game of Thrones: billionaire CEO's complain about each other to the government to get their competitors blocked/tripped up with acts of fiat, which is what happened with Fable 5. And in the linked post, it says GPT-5.6 access decisions are supposedly just hand picked. The stories about export controls are just songs they sing to the peasants. There are claims that Chinese companies are mining + reselling Claude subscriptions like crazy anyway.

It's looking good until you start to see the US gov forcing cloudflare to block hugging face and others.

by bilekas 4mo ago

It's looking good until you start to see the US gov forcing cloudflare to block hugging face and others.

15155 4mo ago

Why do they need to "force Cloudflare" to do anything? Why wouldn't they just tell Hugging Face that they need to abide export restrictions directly - they're an American company? Doesn't sound dystopian enough without a second compelled entity?

bilekas 4mo ago
Because the models don't necessarily need to be hosted on hugging face. You can create a Model Card repository containing your README and from there you include instructions or a custom script in your repository that allows authenticated users to download the model. > Doesn't sound dystopian enough without a second compelled entity? This is the second snarky question you've made today, the other in relation to the export limit. > Is this just upsetting because it's a product you want to enjoy? Both are assumptions you are making and don't provide much in the way of constructive conversation, if I'm wrong about something it's alright to just point it out.
- 15155 4mo ago
  > don't necessarily need to be hosted on hugging face. Export restrictions don't split generally hairs on technicalities like "hosting" - the "but magnet links aren't actually torrents!" defense doesn't fly when $1M fines and federal felonies are at stake. All distribution or "causing" distribution to restricted entities is prohibited. > This is the second snarky question you've made today It's not snark: why would Cloudflare somehow be legally or technically relevant in the context of two American companies distributing export-restricted materials? HN seems to love the "Cloudflare controls the internet!" "NSA bad!" trope.
  - bilekas 4mo ago
    > Export restrictions don't split generally hairs on technicalities like "hosting" - the "but magnet links aren't actually torrents!" defense doesn't fly when $1M fines and federal felonies are at stake. All distribution or "causing" distribution to restricted entities is prohibited. So why would open models that are not in the US be restricted ? The government would need to subpoena each model that was in the US individually, why would they do that when they could simply pull clout over CloudFlare, which we have seen governments do around the world. Either CloudFlare comply, or they're added a block list. > https://cybersecurityadvisors.network/2025/04/15/la-liga-blocking-of-cloudflare-ips-in-spain/ https://cybersecurityadvisors.network/2025/04/15/la-liga-blo... This is not a new thing, anyway this discussion has become too argumentative for an off the cuff comment about government over-reach.
    - 15155 4mo ago
      > So why would open models that are not in the US be restricted ? Nobody said they would be? > subpoena each model that was in the US individually What does this even mean? Where did 'subpoenas' come into this conversation and how would that be useful? > simply pull clout over CloudFlare Cloudflare is an American CDN. Hugging Face is an American catalog/distributor (whatever semantic game you want to play) of models. Some of those models could be declared export-regulated. No subpoena is necessary to prevent Hugging Face or Cloudflare from distributing ITAR/EAR software, declaring any model as such, nor is trying to block something heavy-handedly at the CDN level necessary: Hugging Face will gladly comply with fine-grained requests. "La Liga" obviously isn't American, which is why Spanish courts are compelling their ISPs (who they actually do control) to block Cloudflare IPs. Cloudflare's customers - who are likely not Spanish - are distributing materials Spanish courts do not approve of. If Spain had the means to compel Cloudflare or their customers in question to do anything, they wouldn't need to take such a blunt approach and block other legitimate customers. Cloudflare isn't involved in that equation and this isn't at all equivalent.
      - bilekas 4mo ago
        I'm going to give you some free advice. Don't assume so much. It's usually a bad start to your point of view, if you assume, you only know what's in your head and not the facts of the matter so sometimes it can come across as if you're saying something you have insight into, but when other people know better, it sounds quite ignorant. Honestly. It's been sage advice for me. And maybe for others. Edit : There's no need to be so argumentative also, I'm not 'against' you or your point, just pointing out some other pov. We're here to discuss.

avaer 4mo ago

They'll just make it a crime to run the models unless they authorize you (classifying it as a munition, like they tried to do with encryption), and if your power bill is suspicious you'll find yourself in jail. Any company providing the models will be deemed a threat to national security. No need to block the download.

15155 4mo ago
Citizens were and are free to use the technology (cryptography and every other export-controlled item); your "power bill is suspicious, go to jail" FUD doesn't really track with history. > Any company providing the models will be deemed a threat to national security. Any company providing specifically-controlled models to foreigners would hypothetically be prosecuted.
- avaer 4mo ago
  There's a famous poem called "First They Came" about how slippery this slope can be in a heated political climate. I don't believe for a second this ends with "foreigners", this is about setting up infrastructure for controlling the technology. Foreigners are just the current excuse. Note that TFA mentions they are supposedly hand-picking access to whoever they want, based on whatever criteria they want, already.
  - 15155 4mo ago
    Ah, invoking Godwin. "First they came" in 1976 when ITAR was first passed, or maybe "first they came" in the 1940s when we didn't export Proximity Fuzes, right? Countries are free to prevent exports of technology. Equating export controls with the Holocaust is disgusting.
    - avaer 4mo ago
      I did not bring in Godwin, but I guess he's here now :D. I'm more trying to invoke GRRM. This is a Game of Thrones: billionaire CEO's complain about each other to the government to get their competitors blocked/tripped up with acts of fiat, which is what happened with Fable 5. And in the linked post, it says GPT-5.6 access decisions are supposedly just hand picked. The stories about export controls are just songs they sing to the peasants. There are claims that Chinese companies are mining + reselling Claude subscriptions like crazy anyway.