I do not think that it is up to Google or CloudFlare to police the internet. If a site is doing something illegal then report it to appropriate gov agency. If gov agency does not anything then get involved into political process to fix that.

If Google, or CF, or whoever are fronting illegal activity with their services, they are absolutely responsible for damages the party they are proxying.

Platforms must be responsible for the content they are hosting, broadcasting, and publishing.

One to one communications between two people exchanging ideas and having a private discussion is different from mass broadcasting.

> Platforms must be responsible for the content they are hosting, broadcasting, and publishing.

> One to one communications between two people exchanging ideas and having a private discussion is different from mass broadcasting.

The highway is used both by those visiting their friends and those doing mass deliveries. Is it the job of the highway maintenance crew to control for what purpose their network is used?

I would like to know if the above analogy stands.

Edit: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27994831

The "owner" of the highway is the government, who regulates commercial traffic differently to personal traffic. The government places strict rules on who is allowed to use the highway, and how it is used.

The highway maintenance crew is akin to the person installing racks for CloudFlare.

Highway are a poor analogy for information broadcast systems in general. Highways are closer to a one to one transmission system rathe than a broadcast system of one to many.

They're already removing things they don't like. I see no reason why they shouldn't remove things that are objectively 100% harmful.

Like seriously, is there a single person on the planet that's going to defend online scams? It's immoral, it's illegal, it benefits no one and harms thousands. And it's not like it's very hard to detect and block either.

If someone were to tell AT&T that this call center customer of theirs is in the business of extorting people for money, they'd at least look at it and help law enforcement accordingly. Cloudflare has a talk-to-the-hand attitude until actively forced by law enforcement. That's an important difference right there.

Gov agencies and political processes take ages to do anything at all.

At this point I'd still like the internet companies doing partial policing of content. At least they'll achieve something.

Because criminal scum pay their bills. You don't think 8Chan was on a free account do you?

The sooner developers realize that Cloudflare is not saving the Internet the better.

At this point I'm convinced that at least 10% of all legitimate economic activity is actually money laundering for crime organizations, in various forms. I imagine that percentage goes even higher in the financial capitals of the world.

That’s the low estimate.

'ey... I'm trafficking Paintings 'ere -- ya know... Art

> what if the mobster running this site is having a bad day and choses to retaliate ?

I wonder if someone with malicious intent could set up a site designed to generate complaints (how exactly would be an exercise for the reader), put it behind Cloudflare, and purposely use the information in the forwarded complaints to harass, abuse, dox, or otherwise harm people.

>One can easily write an email to [email protected] and usually these people do not want garbage on their networks. CF is making it impossible to do notify them, and they refuse to implement an alternative procedure.

But that's exactly what CF does. They forward your abuse complaints to the abuse contact of the IP address hosting the content.

The retaliation is quite real—CF keeps your entire e-mail address and name in there, so you are essentially doxxing yourself. Pretty sure 8chan posted a lot of the reports they got back in the day.