Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 172 posts

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#131

Post by walrus01 »

ryan-c wrote: post #21
SomeRandomDev wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like China is good about public/shared VPN's. If you set up your own and keep the details to yourself I was under the impression that it'd work just fine. That being said I love to travel and can work wherever but haven't been to CN yet for this reason in particular.

From what I've heard second-hand (my SO has a friend who frequently travels to China), they do actually block people's private one-off VPN servers quite effectively. Have a look at https://www.cs.tufts.edu/comp/116/archive/fall2016/ctang.pdf - it talks about GFW using machine learning with flow analysis to do this.

basically, netflow analysis tools feeding into an automated pattern matching system. 100% crypto traffic no matter what looks different than usual usage patterns. The netflow tools need some time to gather enough flow statistics between your outside-china VPN endpoint and your domestic IP, but once that's gathered, it's pretty hard to get around.

tools like obfsproxy for openvpn can help.

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#132

Post by Rjevski »

sametmax wrote: post #67
Matt3o12_ wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While we are at it, I still pay 1€ a minute for international calls (EU/Switzerland/USA) but I can talk for hours on WhatsApp, and FaceTime audio before I come close to 1GB data. Telecoms don’t charge in propositions for what they are providing (the cost + small markup for profit), they charge what they think customers are willing to pay, and since there is no real competition (at least in my country), they can do pr…

Weird. In france calls in in the eu and to the usa are free and unlimited on most contracts.

The calls are free for you, the carrier still pays - nowhere near the robbery-grade rates they would normally give to out-of-bundle international mobile calls, but they’re probably paying around 1p a minute for most of the EU.

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#133

Post by lostlogin »

arghwhat wrote: post #125
lostlogin wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taxing social media is like taxing you for saying or hearing a specific word or sentence on the phone, or every time a certain show is broadcast on the TV. This is absurd, and a violation of free speech. Is it? After the shenanigans that have been uncovered with recent elections (specifically referring to the US and Britain, I’m sure there are others) is ‘free speach’ really anthing that is being defended by opposi…

Just because the U.S. and Britain fails to care about free speech and human rights doesn't mean that the battle is not worth fighting. This tax is in direct opposition to free speech, so opposing it defends free speech. It is, however, only a single battle in a very long war.

But the companies hit own the forums, and don’t support free speech. I agree that it’s a potentially slippery slope for regulation, but it’s not currently an area where free speech is tolerated. Just yesterday Zuckerberg was apologising for censoring inappropriately. I don’t have a strong view either way, I’m just not convinced that the ‘free speech’ aspect is as direct as you state.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/07/05/facebook-censors...

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#134

Post by walrus01 »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #128

I agree with almost all of the frustrated comments here, and the premise of the article. I was also involved with a major F50 that was warily forced to deal with various regimes trying to filter content. But consider for a moment: 'Globalization' is having many nefarious effects on the world - and the 'openness' of the internet is generally only a mostly positive aspect from powers that are large and centralized. Ame…

> Tax bases are a real thing - and though the Internet should in the long run provide more opportunity for local governments, in the present it's causing losses in tax revenues, or at least, those revenues created by new economies are not being realized locally.

nothing is stopping governments from taxing physical, tangible things. Nothing is stopping governments from taxing the gross revenue (such as the WA state business and occupation tax) of ISPs and telecoms in general. Nothing is stopping governments from taxing per-subscriber revenue from mobile phone data connections. The four HSPA+/LTE operators in Pakistan pay a shitload of tax to the government and it works generally quite well.

Where this breaks is when they start deciding to tax specific types of internet content at TCP/IP layer 3, and layers 4-7 in the OSI model. That's fucked.

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#135

Post by gesman »

gascan wrote: post #104
arghwhat wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxing TV and phone is like taxing internet connectivity. While a bit odd, this is perfectly fine. The reason for this is that it does not discriminate content, but only care about the utility itself. Taxing social media is like taxing you for saying or hearing a specific word or sentence on the phone, or every time a certain show is broadcast on the TV. This is absurd, and a violation of free speech, as it discrimin…

Taxing TV and phone is like taxing internet connectivity. Is it? Then why do you pay taxes to use VOIP? Is internet not a carrier, while TV & phone are services?

VOIP fees are not taxes - merely upfront fee for an agreed upon add-on service.

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#136

Post by wmf »

temp-dude-87844 wrote: post #64

The Uganda OTT tax is probably meant to stifle online political speech and organizing, but the concept itself, taxing most over-the-top communication mediums that use the mobile networks solely as an opaque data pipe (and typically only work with their captive apps) is a concept that merits more discussion than being patently called "absurd". These services aren't interoperable, they exfiltrate data to foreign countr…

exfiltrate data to foreign countries (where they may be subject to foreign intercept)

If you're, say, a Ugandan dissident would you rather be spied on by the NSA or the Ugandan government? Tunneling all data out of the country may be safer for the majority of people, but maybe I'm falling for the trope of downtrodden poor who are being exploited by their (presumably) oppressive government.

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#137

Post by dcbadacd »

rootsudo wrote: post #118
walrus01 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

or uzbekistan, or russia, or vietnam, or cuba, or belarus, or iran, or most small pacific island nation-states... I've worked in African telecom and many countries there are really good examples of the phenomenon but are by no means the only.

Philippines is also another great example.

and France, both have similar internet limitations.

https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2017/france

https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2017/philippines

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#138

Post by sonnyblarney »

walrus01 wrote: post #134
sonnyblarney wrote: post #128

I agree with almost all of the frustrated comments here, and the premise of the article. I was also involved with a major F50 that was warily forced to deal with various regimes trying to filter content. But consider for a moment: 'Globalization' is having many nefarious effects on the world - and the 'openness' of the internet is generally only a mostly positive aspect from powers that are large and centralized. Ame…

> Tax bases are a real thing - and though the Internet should in the long run provide more opportunity for local governments, in the present it's causing losses in tax revenues, or at least, those revenues created by new economies are not being realized locally. nothing is stopping governments from taxing physical, tangible things. Nothing is stopping governments from taxing the gross revenue (such as the WA state bu…

"nothing is stopping governments from taxing physical, tangible things."

When information is the product of the new economy, and where value is created, it has to be part of the tax base.

"Nothing is stopping governments from taxing the gross revenue (such as the WA state business and occupation tax) of ISPs and telecoms in general."

True, but this layer of the value chain is not where the new information economy is being developed.

"Where this breaks is when they start deciding to tax specific types of internet content at TCP/IP layer 3"

'Content' and 'Layer' are separate issues - they are intertwined for pragmatic reasons, and I agree doing it at 'an internet layer' is dumb ... but there's no clear way around it.

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#139

Post by debt »

walrus01 wrote: post #106

As a professional network engineer this is utterly preposterous. Ignorant government officials who know nothing about how the Internet actually works, trying to fuck with it because it's something beyond their petty attempts at control. When will people realize that blocking VoIP and blocking a ton of other stuff (Ethiopia and the UAE are great examples), in the long term and in aggregate, results in more economic da…

"results in more economic damage"

That's a cost the people in power are willing to bear; or should I say that's the cost the people in power are willing to offload onto to the powerless as a way to make the powerless have even less power.

Re: Uganda Bans VPNs to Prevent Users from Dodging Its New Social Media Tax

#140

Post by [deleted] »

gesman wrote: post #135
gascan wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxing TV and phone is like taxing internet connectivity. Is it? Then why do you pay taxes to use VOIP? Is internet not a carrier, while TV & phone are services?

VOIP fees are not taxes - merely upfront fee for an agreed upon add-on service.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN