I don’t know the backstory but Cloudflare arguing for an open internet is super ironic, presumably he means they want the be the one to close it off and are upset that someone else is ruining their monopoly on it.

▲

k4rli a day ago | parent | next [-]

Definitely getting that vibe. Also praising M*sk and USA leadership clearly points to only having his business interests in mind.

Feels like engagement bait for attention seeking. No doubt they'll still keep the Olympics contracts as they are.

▲

adrr a day ago | parent | next [-]

1.1.1.1 DNS is just querying root DNS servers. And @elon.jet twitter account was just querying ADS data and posting it. Its exactly same, yet this guy praises Elon.

▲

bflesch a day ago | parent [-]

DNS lookups via 1.1.1.1 are also directly fed into the US surveillance state so peter thiel can use his palantir dashboard to see if you are the antichrist or not.

	▲	jacquesm a day ago \| parent [-]
		I'm sure he has a mirror lying around somewhere?

▲

nipponese a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Is agreeing with an adversary on a single point the same as praising them?

	▲	jimnotgym a day ago \| parent [-]
		Interesting choice of words to try and make the logic sound ok. Try: 'Is praising an adversary on a single issue the same as praising them'. Yes, yes it is

▲

Almondsetat a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Here's the backstory:

A government agency in Italy which is known nation-wide to complain and fine other institutions for the stupidest and pettiest reasons, fined another institution for a stupid and petty reason. But of course, ignorant people just see this single occurrence and make up conspiracy theories about it. (Really, if you looked at some examples of previous fines and complaints by AGCOM you would laugh your ass off independently of your political stance)

▲

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

blibble a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

USian tech-CEO posting petulant self-serving arguments about "FREEDOM" on twitter? what a cliche

cloudflare have deliberately designed their network so that every IP can serve up every cloudflare website

this means a court order can't block a single cloudflare site without blocking every cloudflare site, causing massive collateral damage

I suspect this is a deliberate business decision: an attempt to raise the "cost" of blocking so high that courts won't attempt to do it at all

and then they make arguments about "it's not technically possible", when it is (farm the target of the orders off to a separate pool of IPs)

and for DNS they could apply a filter based on the source IP country of origin

Prince: please, please, please exercise your empty threat, and withdraw your shitty company's services from Italy

and then you'll watch as Italy then raises it at the EU level, and then you'll have to do the same there too

▲

great_wubwub a day ago | parent [-]

> this means a court order can't block a single cloudflare site without blocking every cloudflare site

Not true. Cloudflare can't block only a single web site _by IP address_ but that's pretty common with IPv4, The same is true of Fastly and AWS and I'd be shocked if there's a mass-market CDN out there that has a unique IPv4 address per customer.

They can absolutely block any site they want at the application layer (SNI or Host header or whatever they use, IDK, I'm a network guy).

	▲	blibble a day ago \| parent [-]
		> I'd be shocked if there's a mass-market CDN out there that has a unique IPv4 address per customer. fortunately you only need to farm out the ones out that are under court orders > They can absolutely block any site they want at the application layer (SNI or Host header or whatever they use, IDK, I'm a network guy). these court orders usually work by getting end user ISPs (which are regulated) to block or reroute the IP and/or DNS entry neither of which can be realistically done due to conscious decisions by cloudflare

▲

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

robinhood a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I honestly don't see the irony. I believe Cloudflare tries to argue for an open internet. I use some of their features on the free plan and it's of tremendous help, especially considering the price I pay (ie 0$). I'm actually super glad that Cloudflare exists.

▲

cubefox a day ago | parent | prev [-]

So you think it's fine that if some Italian agency orders Cloudflare to block some domain on it's 1.1.1.1 public DNS (or Google on it's 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4) it should be blocked for everyone on Earth who is using this DNS server, including yourself? And if you think otherwise, you are merely "upset that someone else is ruining their monopoly on it"?