[SRG]

It was enough to mention Wikileaks on a post about Amazon at Hacker News to get plenty of downvotes. And I don't see how anything other than a court decision should make the hosting service provider to selectively discontinue the service to some of its customers. Hosting providers should not censor proactively.

Amazon simply proved that their "cloud" services are subject to corporate (= unregulated) censorship, and cannot be relied upon. What's worse, they proved that their services may have zero availability and no scalability at all precisely when the customer really needs them.

[tzs]

It is not censorship to stop hosting someone who is violating several points of your terms of service. Wikileaks only got on Amazon in the first place because Amazon has an automated sign up, which can be abused.