New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
And this is the biggest kick in the teeth: Cloudflare does not offer any option to specify external name servers at all, only a domain transfer. This looks like a subtle lock-in tactic to make it harder for customers to leave.
Yeah, I mean it’s a trade off for comparatively lower prices. But CF is not great for making that move. I recommend Namecheap for your purposes. I use Porkbun as well, so that’s a backup.
Cloudflare is shit though for these type of things. See kiwifarm incident, how cf initially hosted kf dns/cdn, outright refuses to take it down before any valid us court order, giving the impression they're a free speech champion, but end up buckled under the pressure of court of public opinion (twitter mob in their case). I believe namesilo ignore dmca if you only use them as registrar, no dns no hosting no email, strictly for domain reg only.
Um, Cloudflare is a private company and therefore exercising their right to take the site down regardless of state pressure or lack thereof is exactly how freedom of speech is practiced. Corporate personhood may be a legal fiction, but the parties at play are the state and the private sectors. Exercising their right to choose, without government interference, how they wish to conduct business is, straight up, the practice of freedom of speech and association. Welcome to capitalism and markets.
It's an economic decision and if you think you can get a critical mass of KF supporters to counteract the pressure, CF will gladly provide service as long as the site follows its ToS. But they are under no obligation to host anything they don't want to, for whatever reason as long as it's not within the enumerated exemptions in the text of the Constitution. Free speech is about choice, and choosing no is also the exercise of agency. Compulsion to host speech it doesn't want to is basically Authoritarianism 101. The "free" in free speech is the prerogative of the speaker.
And every company engages in puffery. KF can sue for breach of contract if they had one if they want it enforced. I remain puzzled that somehow so many people trot out the free speech banner without understanding how the concept is interpreted. You are free to speak, and the private entity is free to choose to not take your money. Free speech.
Oh, and @WiFi just a quick note that filing false DMCA notices on purpose is conceptually committing perjury. If you request CF to send you the notices and counter-notice (you, by choosing todo business in the US, is treated as a US person for these purposes). There's more than enough nexus to allow US courts jurisdiction and while rare, it's not unheard of for the other party to be sanctioned by the courts in a variety of ways.The story got covered by Techdirt and maybe EFF should at least see the bat beacon. The likelihood of some serious negative conseuencce isn't high, but it's also not nothing. CF is not your lawyer, but plenty of lawyers more competent than their in-house team can be. Never hurt to ask.
Indeed it is, but thats not my point.
That's true, but there are reasonable arguments that, at a certain size, you become a de facto town square. Such arguments are typically more often levied against social media companies, though, but it hasn't yet gone up to the Supreme Court.
Hello. Come on, what are you even talking about. They do not even provide the complaint text and they do not reply in the ticket. Spend a year and a half suing them and pouring more money into it? Absolutely not. I have already moved to another service and completed the migration successfully.
Also, it is not good when half of the internet depends on Cloudflare. It is better when clients diversify risk, help other market participants grow, and avoid creating a monster that controls 90% of the web.
preach
Excellent. The business owner is in full panic mode now. He is filing AI-generated complaints everywhere, and I have already received the text of the one he sent to my new CDN. So it turns out he is available and actively responding after all, yet he never replied to me even once. On top of that, he has wiped his Facebook page clean.
Well, well, well. So it is apparently acceptable to defraud clients and ignore them completely, but the moment the pressure is on, suddenly there is time to write to everyone, and very quickly too. That does not look good at all.
😂😂😂😂😂 Don't forget to document it 📚
Yeah that’s a much more reasonable ask than “ignore everything,” but even then it’s a fine line for providers.
https://prq.se is known to be a host of controversial sites "We are not sensitive to pressure in the form of legal threats (we even have our own legal staff), bad press, campaigns, organized boycotts, angry mobs, etc. We host several very controversial websites, and have a spotless track record in regard to this."
Or https://svea.net/ which seems to be in the same vein and has vps
Cheers to you, mate. Document the crashout.
Yeah like when Spanish courts gave Laliga full authority to block CF ips during a football match and any site using CF may be blocked.
Someone tried to do a docker pull and got blocked in Spain
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47738883
This is great. What CDN are you using now?
At this point, I am on Bunny, and they do not accept well-reasoned responses. They are also not satisfied with the fact that they are used only as a reverse proxy, and they went even further by interfering in matters outside their scope, specifically how the contact form might be used in the future.
They gave me 24 hours to resolve the abuse complaint, so I paid for an expedited consultation with a local attorney, who provided them with a five-page written legal justification of our position, including references to the Constitution and citations to state law. Bunny replied that they would discuss the matter internally with their team.
So Bunny is also not suitable for any serious projects. They react to any complaint generated by AI without supporting evidence, meaning plain text from an anonymous person is enough, while a response presented in the same format is not acceptable to them. In other words, they appear predisposed from the outset to take the complainant’s side.
I think you may just have to host your site without a cdn. There simply isn't any cdn that can meet your needs. Maybe just use Buyvm Anycast or put another pro free speech host in front of your buyvm server.
Yes, I came to the same conclusion, and I am building a mirror-based setup hosted only on free speech-friendly hosts without reverse proxying.
...
Thank you for pointing them out. I had never heard of them before. That said, the first provider has a rather limited connection at only 40 Mbps. In practice, that is sufficient for 98% of use cases, but I have not seen many providers advertise anything below 100 Mbps. Most seem to offer anywhere from 250 Mbps to 1.5 Gbps.
I would look into using Haproxy to build your own reverse proxy.
or try this https://basedflare.com/ Their source code is FOSS so you can do it yourself too.
Just the name is great lol.
@wadhah, do you do cdn besides ddos protection?
Hi all,
Are there any U.S. alternatives to Incognet for a U.S. mirror without a CDN? They are out of VPS capacity on the East Coast and in the central U.S. Only the West Coast is available, which I do not want.
Support for the free speech concept is a must.
kyun.host is the same.
I told you, your site is illegal in the EU, what did you expect?
Stop complaining about legit providers kicking your illegal content.
I looked at the site and I can't see anything that would be even remotely illegal. IANAL, but it looks like nothing more than documentation and a timeline of what occurred, albeit with a childish play-on-words as the name.
Then we have not seen the same site.
What is illegal about it? If it's obviously illegal, it's not obvious at all to me. Is the issue defamation? Publishing information about when things were purchased? Is it the domain name? Publishing the information of a person that is already public?
Genuinely asking. I don't know EU law well but nothing in there screams "crime" to me.
Get in touch
We’ll sort you out.
Since we are not lawyers, it makes no sense to waste time discussing this.
Just the fact that you are arguing that publishing private home addresses and personal contact details of individuals "which are already public" can be fine under GDPR shows that you do not have a clue.
According to a quick search, the GDPR applies to "the aggregated management of personal data" and not to "private information that is not intended to be stored in a file". I also see criticism that the GDPR does not address doxing by random people, but that there are other laws in place in the EU which do.
U.S. law essentially makes all U.S. companies government honeypots. For that reason, they couldn’t become GDPR-compliant until the U.S. and the EU reached an agreement addressing this issue when the GDPR was implemented.