As for how to compare CloudFlare and Google - that’s difficult, because they provide too different services.
The comparison article probably needs to mention the walled garden definition article, which spotlights the 3 oppressions:
(oppression 1) Exclusion— to keep people out
(oppression 2) Trapping— to keep people locked-in and held captive by inducing dependency
(oppression 3) Opacity— to keep people uninformed
When it’s decomposed that way, it makes comparison feasible. It’s kind of similar to drugs. Psilocybin is a very different UX than cocaine and caffeine. But you can compare the addictions of very different drugs by separating psychological addiction from chemical addiction. And in each you can talk about the intensity of the addiction.
The article at hand separated wants from needs. This makes the comparison manageable. Facebook is roughly comparable to having a psychological addiction whereby it’s largely a matter of self-control. Whereas Cloudflare would be roughly more analogous to a chemical addiction, where if you stop using it you are penalized by losing things you need (things that support your human rights).
The overall problem the article tackles is Google and Facebook as widely known villains that the masses are well aware of. Cloudflare is widely unknown and gets no heat from digital rights orgs (many of which naively put their own resources in Cloudflare’s walled garden). It’s a huge oversight when Cloudflare has much more of a stranglehold on essential resources and it’s far less escapable. Cloudflare should be getting the biggest spotlight of all.
CloudFlare irks me when I try to protect myself against spam and ads. It’s a constant dance of turning security measures on and off to get through their barriers.
I never directly use Cloudflare because of my boycott on it. I will go as far as to grab archive.org-mirrored content to reach CF’d content but that’s as far as I go. Tor actually helps me avoid CF, inherently. So I’m curious what protections you use from spam and ads and how that affects your Cloudflare visits. That needs to be documented. In fact, it would help expand the list groups excluded. If Cloudflare is mistreating uMatrix users, for example, then that should be added as a group of people Cloudflare excludes.
I never directly use Cloudflare because of my boycott on it. I will go as far as to grab archive.org-mirrored content to reach CF’d content but that’s as far as I go. Tor actually helps me avoid CF, inherently. So I’m curious what protections you use from spam and ads and how that affects your Cloudflare visits. That needs to be documented. In fact, it would help expand the list groups excluded. If Cloudflare is mistreating uMatrix users, for example, then that should be added as a group of people Cloudflare excludes.
Neither do I - my post was not clear enough about that.
I often need to use CloudFlare-equipped sites, and often have to adjust NoScript and uBlock to get them to work. :)
The comparison article probably needs to mention the walled garden definition article, which spotlights the 3 oppressions:
When it’s decomposed that way, it makes comparison feasible. It’s kind of similar to drugs. Psilocybin is a very different UX than cocaine and caffeine. But you can compare the addictions of very different drugs by separating psychological addiction from chemical addiction. And in each you can talk about the intensity of the addiction.
The article at hand separated wants from needs. This makes the comparison manageable. Facebook is roughly comparable to having a psychological addiction whereby it’s largely a matter of self-control. Whereas Cloudflare would be roughly more analogous to a chemical addiction, where if you stop using it you are penalized by losing things you need (things that support your human rights).
The overall problem the article tackles is Google and Facebook as widely known villains that the masses are well aware of. Cloudflare is widely unknown and gets no heat from digital rights orgs (many of which naively put their own resources in Cloudflare’s walled garden). It’s a huge oversight when Cloudflare has much more of a stranglehold on essential resources and it’s far less escapable. Cloudflare should be getting the biggest spotlight of all.
I never directly use Cloudflare because of my boycott on it. I will go as far as to grab archive.org-mirrored content to reach CF’d content but that’s as far as I go. Tor actually helps me avoid CF, inherently. So I’m curious what protections you use from spam and ads and how that affects your Cloudflare visits. That needs to be documented. In fact, it would help expand the list groups excluded. If Cloudflare is mistreating uMatrix users, for example, then that should be added as a group of people Cloudflare excludes.
Neither do I - my post was not clear enough about that.
I often need to use CloudFlare-equipped sites, and often have to adjust NoScript and uBlock to get them to work. :)