Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

"Which is an imperfect solution at best, and given I have no idea who bunny.net is it's a questionable solution at best."

Anyone who is a bunny.net customer would have an idea. Unlike many of the myriad wesbites using Google fonts, they would also have an agreement with Bunny they could potentially enforce.

Anyone doing internet research who peruses publicly available scans of DNS ports in the last five years would likely be familiar with bunny.net as they are a large enough CDN to have many thousands of subdomains for customer IPs. It is seemingly impossible to miss this company's presence toward the beginning of the scan.

The founder of bunny.net recently posted a question in an nginx forum. This is not AWS or Google. Amazon sells goods. Google sells online advertising services. Both are primarily intermediaries (middlemen) who try to prioritise their own competing goods/services. All the data those companies collect may feed into other business that strives to study and understand consumer behaviour, e.g., placing internet-connected microphones (referred to only as "speakers") in people's homes or internet-cnnected GPS trackers in their pockets. There are strong incentives for those companies to conduct extensive surveillance. Bunny sells CDN services. At present, that's all, AFAICT.

1. https://bunny.net/our-story

This HN submission purports to mirror the recent announcement of fonts on the bunny.net blog on 16 June however it currently points to an "About" page, not the blog entry. The blog entry discloses in more detail the rationale for the decision to offer fonts.

https://bunny.net/blog/bringing-privacy-back-into-your-own-h...

There is an argument supported by legal decisions in Austria, Denmark and Germany that neither Google Fonts nor Google Analytics are GDPR-compliant.

https://www.theregister.com/2022/01/31/website_fine_google_f...



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: