Conversation

Replying to

They've dropped tons of customers. They did a mass purge of sites associated with sex workers among many others. You can find lots of information on it easily: twitter.com/DanielMicay/st Not sure what's absurd about pointing out they regularly remove content they find immoral.

Quote Tweet

Daniel Micay

@DanielMicay

Sep 1

Replying to @DanielMicay @alicemazzy and @jkachmar

One of the sex worker sites they banned from their main services was just a Mastadon instance for sex workers to talk to each other (Switter). They banned that, but not Kiwi Farms. theverge.com/2018/4/19/1725 Government never ordered them to ban this. It was entirely their choice.

Ideally annoying interlocutor

@adrusi

Sep 1

Replying to

@DanielMicay

Yeah this seems like fear about legal liability bc of FOSTA. The fact you perceive it as merely an excuse doesn't make it so. I point out that claiming they support kiwi farms is absurd, bc once you notice your theory has absurd conclusions, that's evidence against the other ones

Replying to

They host content for the Taliban and many other US sanctioned entities. They host Kiwi Farms. They aren't afraid of legal liability for it. They make it clear in their own post they do not consider themselves liable for the content for their caching reverse proxy / firewall.

Replying to

and

do you think they support the taliban?

Replying to

and

They consider the Taliban's content more valid than spam they remove hourly which is saying something. They materially support them. Their ideology is that it's valid political speech, and they support that, which is what I was saying about how they view Kiwi Farms.

Ideally annoying interlocutor

Replying to

and

If I were offer a free http caching service, I'd be concerned about assholes who try to DoS that service by filling my cache with automatically generated spam. Using just my home internet hookup I could claim 1 PB of their cache in 100 days.

Ideally annoying interlocutor

Replying to

and

Idk what their spam policy is, but there is a type of spam that's threatening to their business.

Replying to

and

Hosting Kiwi Farms is threatening their business far more than providing services to sites with auto-generated SEO spam they purge. They already removed the Daily Stormer, 8chan and many other sites. Removing Kiwi Farms would not be setting a new precedent usable against them.

Ideally annoying interlocutor

Replying to

and

I agree it would not be a new precedent. I just don't like the precedent, and would not campaign to extend it, despite not liking kiwi farms one bit, and being quite vulnerable to kiwi farms harassment were I to become a notable personality.

Replying to

and

They really don't limit themselves to public figures / notable people. It's less likely they'll find someone if they aren't but if people have a public social media presence on a site like Twitter and fit some of their criteria then they're a potential target for Kiwi Farms.

Replying to

and

Cloudflare is hardly 'core infrastructure' and no one needs them to host a website. They could host a website on a laptop with their home internet by hosting it as a Tor onion service. Cloudflare is just making it cheaper and easier to make it much more accessible/scalable.

7:56 AM · Sep 1, 2022Twitter Web App

Replying to

and

Cloudflare says they aren't hosting it, just providing them services, and Kiwi Farms does have another host that's providing the origin servers. The primary consequence of Cloudflare dropping them is that people could see who is hosting that and pressure them to stop doing it.