Of course CloudFlare's "view" of the situation is "skewed".

So's the Tor project's.

So's the view of the website operators receiving this traffic.

Cloudflare's post acknowledge the fact that there are at least three major points of view on this problem. The Tor project, by contrast, is increasingly striking me as taking on a petulant tone by refusing to acknowledge that and acting (implicitly if nothing else) as if their view is the only one.

To be honest, the core problem here is not Cloudflare. The core problem is that their customers don't really want Tor traffic. Cloudflare is, to my eye, bending over backwards for Tor compared to what I'd expect from a corporation, however it may feel to Tor. I would suggest the Tor project and its users, however annoyed they may be at their day-to-day experience, are ill-advised to take a petulant tone here, lest Cloudflare indeed give their customers the ability to whitelist and blacklist Tor as a whole... because I completely agree with Cloudflare that effectively nobody is going to whitelist it.

Did you intend this as a reply to something else? I can't even connect your comment to what I said. It starts with "wrong" but doesn't seem to address anything I said.

Please bullet/number your concerns as self-contained statements and I'll explicitly reference them. And yes, my response is to your comment, though do see how it's possible it's ambiguous to how I'm addressing your concerns. Thanks for the comment.

It's not his job to format his comment to make it convenient for you to rebut. I agree that it's not at all clear how your reply addresses the original comment. Perhaps you could fix that by quoting the portions of the original comment you're replying to, rather than requiring line numbers.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I should format my comment because he refuses to do so, right? He refused to respond to my response to his even in part, though I should spend more time on it, right. My reading of his comment is he didn't read my comment, and he he can't read, there's nothing I am able to do.

Look, I'm just letting you know that from a third party perspective, you come across as the unreasonable one, both in this sub-thread, and throughout most of these comments. It seems like people are bringing up good points and you're refusing to engage, perhaps because you're so invested in your own point of view that you're unable to recognize the legitimacy of others'.

To your specific question, the parent comment's points were well reasoned, and your response read as completely orthogonal. If it wasn't, then yes, the onus is on you to demonstrate the relevance.

Plain English please, no idea beyond your meta ranting about how I comment on a topic, when your not even express a logic response to my comment. More to the point if you have something to express about the topic, if you want to be meta on comments post a link to an "Ask HN:" state a position in Plain English and post a link to it here. Cheers!

You know, I worried a bit that I was overshooting with my choice of the word "petulant". Thank you for putting that worry to rest.

You are not doing the Tor project any favors here.

Cloudflare's purpose is to make money. If anyone thinks they are here to help make the world better, that's a naive view. Tor's purpose is to help people access data that may be inaccessible to them without it and to help guard against invasion of privacy. While those things can be used for illicit purposes (as shown by the amount of rouge traffic on Tor exit nodes) the return on quality of life for the whole is greatly improved. Tor literally makes the world a better place, regardless of the fact malicious traffic also comes out of it.

Cloudflare does not make the world better for everyone, but it does a great job of making the world better for those who have access to resources, such as dedicated IPs and venture capitalists.

Capitalism has failed, and it's starting to force that fail onto the Internet in a big way. We need to be smarter about how we approach building trusted infrastructure. All that starts with how we approach building infrastructure companies.

If it's an infrastructure service model and it ain't bootstrapped and sustainable, don't use it.

That's a sad statement. Cloudflare is one of my role model for publicity and profit tactics. Everyone can use Cloudflare for free. Companies are their only customers.

I hear that statement may make you sad, but statements themselves hold no emotions, unless you are speaking for the feelings of those who made the statement. I don't allow others to speak for my feelings and I try to not speak for theirs.

The hard fact is that capitalism is a complex type of game theory, with the objective of winning and making more money. If there are those that think that building the best infrastructure we can for all is dependent on building companies that make VCs and limited partnerships even more money, I will do whatever is in my power to dispel those beliefs.

I do this because I believe our future is dependent on it, not because I'm sad about it. If anything, I don't trust the current process.

The only correspondence you had with the CloudFlare CEO in that thread was:

> eastdakota: I work for CloudFlare. We don't get anything from Google for using reCAPTCHA.

I think you might have gotten a username confused.

Why do you believe I'm mistaken? eastdakota, is the Cloudflare CEO's account.

It's Cloudflare, not Cloudflair.

Cloudflair is how their employees express themselves.

Thanks, fixed the typo!

:)

Actually, I got it wrong as well, because it's really CloudFlare.

Also Tor, not TOR...

It was TOR, now it's Tor. I like TOR better, since it makes it clear the letters have a meaning.