There are European alternatives. And also Anubis. I'm not sure how effective Anubis is but I do see it in many places.
What problem would be solved by this hypothetical migration?
I trink this is rooted in forward thinking. If cloud flare gets a monopoly in that position (what it arguably already has), they can project all the power of a monopoly about us...
So this is more about preventing future problems and not solving problems that exist.
So this is more about preventing future problems and not solving problems that exist.
The question remains unanswered: which problems, hypothetically or otherwise, would this migration solve?
Cloudflare projecting its dominating power onto lemmy?
Cloudflare projecting its dominating power onto lemmy?
I'm sorry, this assertion is meaningless scaremongering. What exactly is "projecting it's dominating power" supposed to mean?
And by the way, may I point out that site maintainers purposely adopted Cloudflare to serve specific purposes?
OK, if there is a monopolistic instance between you and the rest of the world that decides who can reach you and who not and you are depending on that single monopolistic instance, I think we all agree that this is a bad thing.
Potential threads from this are (but not limited to):
OK, if there is a monopolistic instance between you and the rest of the world that decides who can reach you
It's the site owners who are rolling out anti-abuse systems. They picked a vendor to meet their needs. I don't think Cloudflare put a gun to their heads to force them to onboard their services. Do you?
Potential threads from this are (but not limited to):
You mean "hypothetical", not "potential".
Meaning, they are imaginary scenarios, and they represent the worst case you could think of.
You need to ask site owners what is their policy for these hypothetical scenarios you invented. On a technical side, removing anti-abuse protection is all it takes to fix it. This means that no action is required to address any of your hypothetical concerns.
I really don't know what you are aiming for...
Concerns about cloudflare becoming an issue are totally valid. Good day.
I really don’t know what you are aiming for…
If you need anyone to spell it out to you, you are mindlessly complaining about programming.dev adopting anti-abuse services from a service provider. When lightly pressed on the topic, you fail to present a single problem of doing that or even a single coherent argument against it.
In short, you failed to point out any problem involving or any reason to replace an anti-abuse system. And yet you argue the service should be replaced.
Is "why" such an insurmountable challenge?
to serve specific purposes
You're asking for specifics on their concerns while not providing the specifics that were already in place in your claim here.
They acknowledged and included reasons for the Cloudflare adoption in their original post.
You’re asking for specifics on their concerns while not providing the specifics that were already in place in your claim here.
If you want to change something, the very least that's expected of you is that the change actually fixes something.
If you can't even put together a description of exactly what's broken, obviously you can't tell if your proposal is even able to fix anything.
And may I point out the fact that this very discussion starts by admitting that alternatives are not effective?
Change for the sake of change is a pointless endeavour. Moreso if it comes from mindless militancy.
Personally I cannot visit most crimeflare sites because it just gives me an infinite captcha loop... so moving away from them seems like that would solve that issue.
Personally, my local Cloudflare seems to have some problem with IPv6 and some sites won't load. On my desktop I've set Firefox to use IPv4 for such sites, but on my phone I need to use mobile data (which doesn't support IPv6). I don't think it's a common problem, but you did ask.
Personally, my local Cloudflare seems to have some problem with IPv6 and many sites won’t load.
Some global ISPs still struggle with IPv6. I recall that until somewhat recently Vodafone didn't supported it at all. Are you sure this is a Cloudflare issue?
Cloudflare gives its 522 error, but I can load via IPv6 from the same city. I've also found the issue with Cf in front of servers I run on a different continent, so I've been able to do some good testing and have spent plenty of time looking into it. I haven't found any other Cloudflare locations with the problem, but there's plenty of them.
Cloudflare gives its 522 error
This means Cloudflare is forwarding the request but the origin server times out. Meaning, it's the origin server that is unable to handle the IPv6 request.
Please reread the first sentence of what you just replied to.
I read, and then I posted. Is there anything in my reply that I can explain to you?
I use Firefox Focus on my mobile and I can't enter sites with CloudFlare because it says my browser is incompatible. It gets annoying when I ramp up my privacy on the Internet and sites outright refuse to load if they see I don't allow cookies and trackers. I'd rather see broken js-free website than pitch black CloudFlare page.
I use Firefox Focus on my mobile and I can’t enter sites with CloudFlare because it says my browser is incompatible.
I also use Firefox Focus and I never experienced that issue at all. Are you sure this is a Cloudflare issue?
Also, site owners are purposely using Cloudflare to protect themselves from abnormal traffic. If site owners are the ones paying Cloudflare to lift these barriers, why do you interpret this issue as a problem created by Cloudflare?
Are you sure this is a Cloudflare issue?
For shits and giggles I logged into programming.dev with Firefox Focus, and suffice to say I'm posting this with that browser.
I also did some tweaking and I did noticed that it I configure Firefox Focus to strip all types of tracking (akin to NoScript) then Cloudflare complains about extensions.
Exactly that, Cloudflare complains about extensions. It's a matter of aggressive tracking protection. I can view Anubis protected sites just fine, only the Cloudflare ones prevent access.
Exactly that, Cloudflare complains about extensions.
What you are describing is not browser incompatibility. It's default fallback page that Cloudflare shows when it fails to run its javascript code.
Site owners such as programming.dev maintainers purposely onboarded Cloudflare to run those scripts, as that's how their anti-abuse system works.
The 'browser incompatibility' is what's written on the fallback page. The question was about the problem that migration from Cloudflare would solve and I provided one particular problem. Not that it affects me personally, because I use a standalone app for Lemmy, but I assume there are some people that do not wish to run Cloudflare js
The ‘browser incompatibility’ is what’s written on the fallback page.
No. The page clearly says "Incompatible browser extension or network configuration".
It then lists a number of troubleshooting steps to get the page to work.
The question was about the problem that migration from Cloudflare would solve and I provided one particular problem.
I don't think so. Site maintainers are expecting your browser to run the scripts to detect and prevent abuse, and you are going way out of your way to not run them. You are not describing a problem.
Have you tried Chrome Mask?
Welcome to the Programming.Dev meta community!
This is a community for discussing things about programming.dev itself. Things like announcements, site help posts, site questions, etc. are all welcome here.