Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by FeepingCreature 1786 days ago
That seems like the sort of thing that should require a judge's order.
1 comments

Cloudflare is not a public institution. It troubles me that they get to define, draw, and then maintain that line.

However, I do agree - privacy unveiling like that should require a judge's order.

But they don't, that's explicitly their stance. There is no line. They host everyone equally. To do the opposite would require drawing a line.
That is not true. They do have a line specified here https://www.cloudflare.com/abuse/

It's just that the procedure is so useless that it might as well not exist.

IANAL, but I don't see a Cloudflare specified line anywhere on this page. I think this is just the bare minimum they are legally required to do.
> There is no line

You are missing the point of the complaint, which is that it's a private decision to hold that policy. Maybe it was a bad idea to use the word "line", but the intent still stands unadressed.

> They host everyone equally.

Everyone except those that are too right wing.

Are you referring to the one incident where they stopped hosting a racist hate site and then vowed to never take sides again?
Yes. Also to the incident where they stopped hosting 8chan after they vowed to never take sides again.

You can agree with Cloudlare not providing services to those sites as much as you want, but you cannot pretend that Cloudflare hosts everyone equally. They cannot use that as an excuse to not deal with spammers.

Well, that one incident shows that they don’t host everyone equally. A very simple and obvious conclusion.
One data point is not a pattern.
"He has never murdered anyone" "Are you referring to the one incident where he shot a racist hater and then vowed to never murder again?"

All I'm saying is that we won't know until they come under pressure again

> All I'm saying is that we won't know until they come under pressure again

That's also true of people who haven't murdered anyone yet, though.

Whom do you trust more? The person who did something and vowed to never do it again, or the person who didn't vow anything? I tend to prefer the former.

Yes, it is akin to revealing the IP of a user on a social media site.