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

Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 301 posts

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#161

Post by rirze »

macintux wrote: post #144
mycall wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are plenty of other ways to virtual data without a VPN, e.g. sockpuppets, ipfs, etc. Since data tends to drift towards being free, it is a game of wack-a-mole.

How many users are going to have the technical acumen & desire to keep playing the game? At some point the number of people who are going to be able to succeed is so small they might know who you are just by virtue of you continuing to compete.

All you need is one and a good business model.

Modern adblocking emerged exactly in the same way. The majority of people who use adblock have no idea what current techniques and methods are used.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#162

Post by martin-t »

rapnie wrote: post #131
mvdwoord wrote: post #16

I am completely baffled by this wave of new laws and proposals... they feel dystopic and can seemingly only lead to brutal restrictions on the internet. What will we end up with? Only attested modems / endpoints in the home? With DPI? And a government issued smartcard to use it? It comes across as if this is what some legislators are actually after... they must have some technical advisors who can explain to them tha…

> I am completely baffled by this wave of new laws and proposals... they feel dystopic Baffled? The whole country's democracy is diving off this cliff, seems to me.

It's not just the US though, EU too.

I don't like far fetched conspiracy theories but I really want to know where all this is coming from. Did politicians suddenly all get the same idea or are there groups lobbying for this who benefit in terms of money/power?

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#163

Post by wartywhoa23 »

mvdwoord wrote: post #16

I am completely baffled by this wave of new laws and proposals... they feel dystopic and can seemingly only lead to brutal restrictions on the internet. What will we end up with? Only attested modems / endpoints in the home? With DPI? And a government issued smartcard to use it? It comes across as if this is what some legislators are actually after... they must have some technical advisors who can explain to them tha…

Well, people who call a fascism a fascism are always wrong until they suddenly aren't.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#164

Post by zeafoamrun »

ijk wrote: post #134
kstrauser wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. That’s how someone with pervasive access to Internet infrastructure could tell when I’m on a VPN. It’s impossible for a given website to tell that I’m accessing it over a VPN. Not difficult: impossible. It cannot be done.

So the individual website has to subscribe to the surveillance operator's IP location verification service, or be fined.

This is exactly it. Compliance is a big business. When your company's lawyers tell you you've gotta do something then you do it. Half my team is wasting time on this bullshit and big money is getting paid to those who make the lists.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#165

Post by nine_k »

paulddraper wrote: post #142
2ndorderthought wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Utah hosts I think the biggest nsa data center. Honestly, I would like my ISP to block all traffic to and from Utah if this law passes. I can't think of anything I want or need that involves that state.

Skiing

I hope e.g. Colorado has better Internet regulations, so I could do my skiing there instead.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#166

Post by wartywhoa23 »

2ndorderthought wrote: post #153
mvdwoord wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without it being good or bad (long term, second order effects), I do think all of these (proposed) laws and where we are heading will balkanize the internet. Alternative tech may sound appealing to the tinkerers, and they may keep certain important channels alive (think radio amateurs... they know this game) but for the masses? I already happily block entire countries or regions to my VPS as there is zero benefit for…

I wish there was an easy way to geolocate ip addresses by us state. It's not too hard to block everything from say russia.

Let's all block whole countries just because our propagandists brainwashed us so, yay, what an Internet that'll be!

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#167

Post by macintux »

rirze wrote: post #161
macintux wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many users are going to have the technical acumen & desire to keep playing the game? At some point the number of people who are going to be able to succeed is so small they might know who you are just by virtue of you continuing to compete.

All you need is one and a good business model. Modern adblocking emerged exactly in the same way. The majority of people who use adblock have no idea what current techniques and methods are used.

Ad blocking isn’t illegal (yet).

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#169

Post by phendrenad2 »

I'm tired of fighting this stuff. The forces allied against internet freedom are just too large for us regular Hacker News nerds to deal with. What we need is a mass awakening of normal people who see the effects of internet censorship and demand a reversal. And sadly, that might not be possible until the normal people get a taste of censorship to realize they don't like it. So now I think, the sooner we go full China the sooner we can get things back to normal.

Re: Utah to hold websites liable for users who mask their location with VPNs

#170

Post by nine_k »

mvdwoord wrote: post #16

I am completely baffled by this wave of new laws and proposals... they feel dystopic and can seemingly only lead to brutal restrictions on the internet. What will we end up with? Only attested modems / endpoints in the home? With DPI? And a government issued smartcard to use it? It comes across as if this is what some legislators are actually after... they must have some technical advisors who can explain to them tha…

It's not the first time when people who despise liberty of others and want to force them jump through unreasonable hoops shoot themselves in their feet.

Saying "you're unwelcome here" to a large enough number of well-meaning people usually backfires. I hope this will be felt during the next elections in Utah.

Post reply on HN