It wasn’t. That it would be dealt with by the courts if it broke the law — that was

So you agree that Cloudflare should be criminally liable for hosting extremist content? (yes, providing CDN service counts as hosting, as the content is stored on Cloudflare's servers)

Did you bother to read the post? They’re not taking money from them

Because society created laws in that way?

I see. So maybe we should go after the ISPs transmitting the information too?

There's a discussion that could be had about whether it's appropriate for ISPs to block sites that are strongly associated with terrorism.

I don't think that discussion can reasonably happen on this forum, but I think there are interesting philosophical positions that are valid that we should put against one another.

It is so interesting that you draw that conclusion. I draw the opposite: that whether Cloudflare withdraws services or not is going to make no meaningful difference to whether KF remains online

> It is so interesting that you draw that conclusion. I draw the opposite: that whether Cloudflare withdraws services or not is going to make no meaningful difference to whether KF remains online

How is it the opposite?