If Cloudflare truly believed in near absolute free speech and allowed anything legal, that would be a different situation than what's happening. Kiwi Farms content isn't even legal. Openly coordinating that level of extreme harassment/doxxing/libel campaigns isn't legal content.
Conversation
Many open source projects have developers who are autistic or trans. Open source developers who are in some way different from what Kiwi Farms considers normal are one of their top targets. Cloudflare says they support open source, but they don't come close to making up for this.
5
114
1,564
twitter.com/DanielMicay/st
Clarification:
Cloudflare supports what they consider 'valid' political speech. This appears to include a site focused on doxxing/harassing people based on them being autistic or trans. They'd kick them off in an instant if they targeted Matthew Prince.
Quote Tweet
Cloudflare does FAR MORE content moderation than required by law. They aren't a free speech host. They remove speech they disagree with every day. They host Kiwi Farms because they support the content on it. They dropped sites used by sex workers because they consider it immoral.
Show this thread
3
75
778
If Kiwi Farms did what they do to others to and his friends/family too, do you think they would still be hosted there? Cloudflare considers it valid political speech when it's done to autistic and trans people. Why is that? Does that extend to Cloudflare employees?
4
48
622
twitter.com/DanielMicay/st
Cloudflare's censored 1.1.1.3 which supposedly exists to provide family friendly internet does not block Kiwi Farms or the Daily Stormer. It mostly blocks porn and still blocks some non-porn LGBT content despite them 'fixing' it (blog.cloudflare.com/the-mistake-th).
Quote Tweet
Cloudflare drops sites from their service on a daily basis for having content they dislike. They remove sites with adult content, support for sex workers, etc. They also drop sites they deem to be posting spam. Cloudflare's censored 1.1.1.3 DNS blocks lots of LGBT content, etc.
Show this thread
4
55
458
Replying to
1.1.1.3 is cloudflare though?
Its a DNS server that firewalls adult content.
Similar to 1.1.1.2 which integrates a virus checker into the firewall (also owned by cloudflare)
2
1
Replying to
Kiwi Farms is clearly 'adult content' but isn't filtered while content that clearly isn't adult content such as quite a lot of LGBT information sites are filtered.
1
Replying to
Could i get an example though? Cause most reports (all i found) of LGBTQ info sites being falsely blocked are pretty old
Apparently the blocklists are based on google safe search. (Which doesnt block kiwifarms either)
What i find more sus here is 1.1.1.2 cause theres 0 info.
1
Replying to
The blocklists are not based on Google SafeSearch. What they state is that their goal was to make something with comparable filtering to Google SafeSearch, which does not have the same kind of issues with blocking LGBTQ content and blocks sites like Kiwi Farms and Daily Stormer.
3
Replying to
Src: blog.cloudflare.com/the-mistake-th
"While we had specifically reviewed the Adult Content category to ensure that it was narrowly tailored to mirror the Google SafeSearch/CIPA definition"
The following media includes potentially sensitive content. Change settings
View
1
Replying to
They tried to make something similar and did a really poor job of it. It isn't based on Google SafeSearch. They have no access to how Google SafeSearch works and it's fundamentally not based on it.
Also, as they state in their own post, they obtain data used for the filtering from a company which provides filtering for LGBTQ content and classifies it as adult content. Do you think that company is unbiased towards LGBTQ content and it's a 'mistake' stuff is still blocked?
2
At least one of their data sources Cloudflare openly admits to using directly sells blocking LGBTQ content as a service and block it by default as part of 'adult content'. Cloudflare 'mistakenly' used the full block list from this company at launch and then narrowed it down more.
1
Show replies
Replying to
I mean, to their own accounts they did not try to recreate SafeSearch but create similar results to it. So its very much still a point of reference.