TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

CloudFlare CEO says his Daily Stormer takedown was “arbitrary” and “dangerous”

53 pointsby untanglealmost 8 years ago

12 comments

Loicalmost 8 years ago
In the company blog post[0] one can read: <i>&quot;The tipping point for us making this decision was that the team behind Daily Stormer made the claim that we were secretly supporters of their ideology.&quot;</i><p>If this is true, then I agree with the takedown, because the Daily Stormer crossed the content neutral line first. But in this interview, the CEO says something totally different. This is what annoys me, because this is breaking the trust I have in CloudFlare.<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;why-we-terminated-daily-stormer&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;blog.cloudflare.com&#x2F;why-we-terminated-daily-stormer&#x2F;</a>
评论 #15034752 未加载
NaliSaucealmost 8 years ago
There&#x27;s a chilling effect to this. If checks and balances at cloudflare are so nonexistent that the CEO having a bad mood results in the company violating its own policy - well, you set the precedent no matter how much you&#x27;re claiming that you didn&#x27;t. Precedent is determined by your past actions, not by what you claim.<p>Blogging what appears to be post hoc rationalizations doesn&#x27;t make this any better.
评论 #15037217 未加载
评论 #15039132 未加载
untanglealmost 8 years ago
&gt; &quot;It&#x27;s important that what we did today not set a precedent,&quot; Prince added. &quot;The right answer is for us to be consistently content neutral.&quot;<p>Huh? What changed then – why even do it? Cloudflare&#x27;s action today could set a dangerous precedent. Prince now seems to be arguing for a committee of some sort to arbitrate who gets taken down. To me, that&#x27;s not much better.<p>IMO the internet should be free. Let filtering be conducted at the edge and driven by users.
评论 #15035099 未加载
评论 #15034486 未加载
patrickg_zillalmost 8 years ago
Whatever happened to:<p>&quot;the Internet detects censorship as damage, and routes around it&quot; and<p>&quot;the answer to speech you don&#x27;t agree with is more speech&quot;?<p>I guess, like &quot;don&#x27;t be evil&quot;, those concepts have ended up on the trash heap...
评论 #15042416 未加载
评论 #15035009 未加载
评论 #15034964 未加载
damnfinealmost 8 years ago
This invalidates all of their previous statements. A very bad PR move. I think we all knew it was at their whim, based on some of the other sites they continue to host. Just more greed masqurading as virtue. That seems to be the speed of progress these days.
Grue3almost 8 years ago
Has anyone even heard of this website before all of this? What&#x27;s the point of all this free publicity for them? Streisand effect is real.
评论 #15036491 未加载
koenigdavidmjalmost 8 years ago
This is the first week in my life I&#x27;ve been genuinely afraid for the First Amendment. Charlottesville is the one event that pushed government content neutrality outside the Overton window. Up until now, most people (or at least the loudest) treated groups like the EFF and ACLU as kind of like garbage collectors: they do an unpleasant job, defending people who say wicked things, in order to protect the rest of us from government persecution when someone we don&#x27;t like has the reins. This is the first time I&#x27;ve seen this view being described as literal Nazi sympathizing. It&#x27;s the first time when hate speech laws are considered so necessary that we&#x27;re willing to give that power to the Trump administration of all people.
评论 #15041707 未加载
Greg-Jalmost 8 years ago
I am clearly in the minority in my opinion here, but I&#x27;m happy for this. CloudFlare is a private business and as such have a right to refuse service to anyone.<p>&quot;It&#x27;s important that what we did today not set a precedent,&quot; Prince added. &quot;The right answer is for us to be consistently content neutral.&quot;
mywittynamealmost 8 years ago
&gt; one that gives publishers a right to due process and doesn&#x27;t put power over those decisions in the hands of a few CEOs like Prince.<p>Fox and CNN have the final say in the content they host, they don&#x27;t give publishers due process. I don&#x27;t see how google is any different, other than scope.
empressplayalmost 8 years ago
I really hope this isn&#x27;t the beginning of the end
评论 #15034773 未加载
napa15almost 8 years ago
This entire ordeal has had many other hidden consequences, for me personally for example I&#x27;ve made the decision to never ever voice my political opinion ever again, whether offline or online. It is simply too dangerous, I do not consider my political opinions to be anywhere near as important as my livelihood or internet access. Take that as an overreaction if you want, but that&#x27;s a real consequence that I&#x27;ve drawn for my life. I cannot risk accidentially running afoul somebody&#x27;s idea of &#x27;unacceptable opinion to hold&#x27;.
ashildralmost 8 years ago
There is no &quot;neutral&quot; when people are questioning other people&#x27;s right of self determination, existence and value as a human being.<p>To quote Elie Wiesel: “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.”
评论 #15035719 未加载